Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1,251

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 37 of the 37 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The accuracy of diagnosis of parkinsonian syndromes in a specialist movement disorder service

Hughes, Andrew J., Daniel, Susan E., Ben‐Shlomo, Yoav, Lees, Andrew J.·2002·Brain
DOI 10.1093/brain/awf080
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

We have reviewed the clinical and pathological diagnoses of 143 cases of parkinsonism seen by neurologists associated with the movement disorders service at The National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery in London who came to neuropathological examination at the United Kingdom Parkinson's Disease Society Brain Research Centre, over a 10-year period between 1990 and the end of 1999. Seventy-three (47 male, 26 female) cases were diagnosed as having idiopathic Parkinson's disease (IPD) and 70 (42 male, 28 female) as having another parkinsonian syndrome. The positive predictive value of the clinical diagnosis for the whole group was 85.3%, with 122 cases correctly clinically diagnosed. The positive predictive value of the clinical diagnosis of IPD was extremely high, at 98.6% (72 out of 73), while for the other parkinsonian syndromes it was 71.4% (50 out of 70). The positive predictive values of a clinical diagnosis of multiple system atrophy (MSA) and progressive supranuclear palsy (PSP) were 85.7 (30 out of 35) and 80% (16 out of 20), respectively. The sensitivity for IPD was 91.1%, due to seven false-negative cases, with 72 of the 79 pathologically established cases being diagnosed in life. For MSA, the sensitivity was 88.2% (30 out of 34), and for PSP it was 84.2% (16 out of 19). The diagnostic accuracy for IPD, MSA and PSP was higher than most previous prospective clinicopathological series and studies using the retrospective application of clinical diagnostic criteria. The seven false-negative cases of IPD suggest a broader clinical picture of disease than previously thought acceptable. This study implies that neurologists with particular expertise in the field of movement disorders may be using a method of pattern recognition for diagnosis which goes beyond that inherent in any formal set of diagnostic criteria.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/brain/awf080

Cites

37 of 37 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 1,251

Metadata

Authors
Hughes, A. J., Daniel, S. E., Ben‐Shlomo, Y., & Lees, A. J.
Venue
Brain
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Published
2002-04
Volume
125
Issue
4
Pages
861-870
ISSN
  • 0006-8950 (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-2156
DOI
10.1093/brain/awf080
OpenAlex
W2093977564
Cited by
1,251
References
37
FWCI
20.93
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.