Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 300

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

How valid is the clinical diagnosis of Parkinson's disease in the community?

Open access
Schrag, A·2002·Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Many patients diagnosed with Parkinson's disease are later found to have an erroneous diagnosis, often only when they come to necropsy; conversely, many patients with Parkinson's disease in the community remain undiagnosed. OBJECTIVE: To assess the validity of a clinical diagnosis of parkinsonism in the general population according to strict published criteria. METHODS: As part of a population based study on the prevalence of Parkinson's disease in London, all patients were identified with a diagnosis of parkinsonism, tremor with onset over age 50 years, or who had ever received antiparkinsonian drugs. All patients who agreed to participate were diagnosed according to strict clinical diagnostic criteria, after a detailed neurological interview and examination and discussion of the findings with examination of their video recordings. Follow up information was obtained over a period of at least one year, and atypical cases were reviewed at the end of the study. RESULTS: A diagnosis of probable Parkinson's disease was confirmed in 83% of patients with this diagnosis, including three (2%) in whom atypical features were found that were insufficient to discard a diagnosis of Parkinson's disease. Two additional patients (2%) were found to have possible Parkinson's disease. However, in 15% of patients the diagnosis was unequivocally rejected. Conversely, 13 patients who had previously not been diagnosed with Parkinson's disease (19%) were found to have this disorder. CONCLUSIONS: At least 15% of patients with a diagnosis of Parkinson's disease in the population do not fulfil strict clinical criteria for the disease, and approximately 20% of patients with Parkinson's disease who have already come to medical attention have not been diagnosed as such.

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 · 10.1136/jnnp.73.5.529

Cites

2 of 2 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 2 references

Cited by

See all 300

Metadata

Authors
Schrag, A.
Venue
Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2002-11-01
Volume
73
Issue
5
Pages
529-534
ISSN
0022-3050 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2106821521
Cited by
300
References
2
FWCI
4.39
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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: How valid is the clinical diagnosis of Parkinson's disease in the community? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/jnnp.73.5.529
The paper
Schrag, A. (2002). How valid is the clinical diagnosis of Parkinson's disease in the community? Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry. https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp.73.5.529

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.