Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 265

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 76 of the 76 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Quality of life in Parkinson's disease: A systematic review and meta‐analysis of comparative studies

Open access
Zhao, Na, Yang, Yuan, Zhang, Ling, Zhang, Qinge, Balbuena, Lloyd, Ungvari, Gabor S., Zang, Yu‐Feng, Xiang, Yu‐Tao·2021·CNS Neuroscience & Therapeutics

Abstract

Background: Studies regarding the impact of Parkinson's disease (PD) on quality of life (QOL) have reported conflicting results, and the underlying QOL domains require further study. In order to understand the association between PD and QOL, we conducted this meta‐analysis to systematically compare QOL between PD patients and healthy controls. Method: The PubMed, PsycINFO, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases were systematically searched. Data were analyzed using the random‐effects model. Results: Twenty studies covering 2707 PD patients and 150,661 healthy controls were included in the study. Compared with healthy controls, PD patients had significantly poorer QOL overall and in most domains with moderate to large effects sizes. Different QOL measures varied in their association with quality of life, with the Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire‐39 (PDQ‐39) having the largest effect size (standard mean difference, SMD = −1.384, 95% CI: −1.607, −1.162, Z = 12.189, P < 0.001), followed by the Europe Quality of Life Questionnaire‐visual analogue scale (EQ‐VAS) (SMD = −1.081, 95% CI: −1.578, −0.584, Z = −4.265, P < 0.001), Europe Quality of Life Questionnaire‐5D (EQ‐5D) (SMD = −0.889, 95% CI: −1.181, −0.596, Z = −5.962, P < 0.001), and the Short‐form Health Survey (SF) scales (physical dimension: SMD = −0.826, 95% CI: −1.529, −0.123, Z = −2.303, P = 0.021; mental dimension: SMD = −0.376, 95% CI: −0.732, −0.019, Z = −2.064, P = 0.039). Conclusion: PD patients had lower QOL compared with healthy controls in most domains, especially in physical function and mental health. Considering the negative impact of poor QOL on daily life and functional outcomes, effective measures should be developed to improve QOL in this population.

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 · 10.1111/cns.13549

Cites

76 of 76 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

Show all 76 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Zhao, N., Yang, Y., Zhang, L., Zhang, Q., Balbuena, L., Ungvari, G. S., Zang, Y., & Xiang, Y.
Venue
CNS Neuroscience & Therapeutics
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2020-12-28
Volume
27
Issue
3
Pages
270-279
ISSN
  • 1755-5930 (ISSN-L)
  • 1755-5949
OpenAlex
W3116760400
Cited by
265
References
76
FWCI
2.64
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Quality of life in Parkinson's disease: A systematic review and meta‐analysis of comparative studies. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/cns.13549
The paper
Zhao, N., Yang, Y., Zhang, L., Zhang, Q., Balbuena, L., Ungvari, G. S., Zang, Y., & Xiang, Y. (2021). Quality of life in Parkinson's disease: A systematic review and meta‐analysis of comparative studies. CNS Neuroscience & Therapeutics. https://doi.org/10.1111/cns.13549

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.