Cited by 8Balance, Gait, and Falls PreventionParkinson's Disease Mechanisms and TreatmentsVoice and Speech Disorders

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Should gait speed be included in the clinical evaluation of Parkinson’s disease?

Open access
Nocera, Joe, Hass, Chris·2012·Advances in Parkinson's Disease

Abstract

Background: The Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale is the most commonly used scale in the clinical study of Parkinson’s disease. However, it may fail to capture the essence of physical impairment in patients with Parkinson’s disease and thus limit responsiveness of care-givers, patients, and/or clinicians as to increasing physical disability. This study sought to compare subjective measures of physical disability in Parkinson’s disease to an objective, accurate, and proven measure of physical function-gait speed. Methods: Eighty-eight individuals with early to moderate stage Parkinson’s disease were evaluated on the Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale, the Parkinson’s disease Questionnaire 39 and during five 8 meter walking trials. Spearman correlations coefficients were used to determine the association among all variables of interest. Results: The findings demonstrate that only a fair to moderate relationship between objectively measured gait speed and physical function as measured subjectively by the clinical rating scale and as evaluated by the patients during self report. Conclusions: The results of this study suggest that commonly utilized measures of physical function in Parkinson’s disease are not highly correlated with gait speed. Because gait speed is demonstrated as a dependable proxy for physical function, the results of this study may provide a rational for the use of gait speed to provide a more accurate picture of physical function in patients with Parkinson’s disease.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.4236/apd.2012.11001

Cites

Statistics

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

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 11

  1. 10.1002/mds.21956 · DOI
  2. 10.1002/mds.20115 · DOI
  3. 10.1007/s00415-010-5573-9 · DOI
  4. 10.1002/mds.10248 · DOI
  5. 10.1007/s004150050265 · DOI
  6. 10.1093/ageing/afr151 · DOI
  7. Braun, B.L. (1998) Knowledge and perception of fall- related risk factors and fall-reduction techniques among community-dwelling elderly individuals. Physical Ther-apy, 78, 1262-1276. · DOI
  8. 10.1097/01376517-200712000-00004 · DOI
  9. 10.1002/mds.21598 · DOI
  10. 10.1002/mds.10396 · DOI
  11. 10.1016/j.apmr.2009.11.026 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Nocera, J., & Hass, C.
Affiliations
  • Emory University (US)
  • University of Florida (US)
Venue
Advances in Parkinson's Disease
Published
2012
Volume
01
Issue
01
Pages
1-4
ISSN
  • 2169-9712 (ISSN-L)
  • 2169-9720
OpenAlex
W2063131823
Cited by
8
References
0
Citations by year
2023: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 2 · 2014: 2
FWCI
1.59
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
Advances in Parkinson s Disease (publishedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Balance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Clinical Neurology › Parkinson's Disease Mechanisms and Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Speech and Hearing › Voice and Speech Disorders
Keywords
Parkinson's disease, walking speed, physical function, Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale, physical disability, clinical rating scales, self-reported disability

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