Cited by 128Parkinson's Disease Mechanisms and TreatmentsNeurological disorders and treatmentsDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research

Association between depression and the subsequent risk of Parkinson's disease: a meta-analysis

Wang, Shun, Mao, Shanping, Xiang, Dan, Fang, Congcong·2018·Progress in Neuro-Psychopharmacology and Biological Psychiatry

Abstract

Background Observational studies, including recent large cohort studies, have reported an association between depression and the risk of Parkinson's disease (PD); however, conclusions were inconsistent. Clarifying this relation might improve the understanding of risk factors for and the disease mechanisms in PD. Therefore, we performed a meta-analysis to examine whether depression is associated with an increased risk of PD. Methods A literature search in the PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, PsycINFO and Web of Science databases was undertaken through March 2018, looking for observational studies evaluating the association between depression and the risk of PD. Pooled relative risk (RR) estimates and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using a random-effects model. Subgroup analyses and sensitivity analyses were also performed. Results A random-effects meta-analysis of 5 cohort studies and 6 case-control studies demonstrated a significant positive association between depression and a subsequent risk of PD (RR, 2.20; 95% CI, 1.87-2.58), and it was consistent across subgroups. Furthermore, sensitivity analysis confirmed the stability of the results; visual examination of funnel plots and Begg's and Egger's tests showed no evidence of publication bias. Conclusions Our meta-analysis demonstrated that persons with depression exhibited an increased risk of a subsequent PD diagnosis. The pathophysiological and psychological mechanisms underlying this association are still unclear a…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.pnpbp.2018.05.025

Cites

45 of 45 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wang, S., Mao, S., Xiang, D., & Fang, C.
Affiliations
Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University (CN)
Corresponding author
Mao, Shanping
Venue
Progress in Neuro-Psychopharmacology and Biological Psychiatry
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2018-08
Volume
86
Pages
186-192
ISSN
0278-5846 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2806019824
Cited by
128
References
45
Citations by year
2026: 16 · 2025: 26 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 17 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 5
FWCI
1.26
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Progress in Neuro-Psychopharmacology and Biological Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Neurology › Parkinson's Disease Mechanisms and Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Neurology › Neurological disorders and treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Keywords
depression, Parkinson's disease, risk factors, neurodegeneration, disease mechanisms, cohort studies, case-control study
MeSH terms
Depression, Depressive Disorder, Humans, Parkinson Disease, Risk Factors

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review