SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Parkinson's Disease Prevalence and Proximity to Agricultural Cultivated Fields.

Parkinsons Dis · 2015-08-18

DOI: 10.1155/2015/576564PMID: 26357584

Open accessresearch-article; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

The risk for developing Parkinson's disease (PD) is a combination of multiple environmental and genetic factors. The Negev (Southern Israel) contains approximately 252.5 km(2) of agricultural cultivated fields (ACF). We aimed to estimate the prevalence and incidence of PD and to examine possible geographical clustering and associations with agricultural exposures. We screened all "Clalit" Health Services members in the Negev (70% of the population) between the years 2000 and 2012. Individual demographic, clinical, and medication prescription data were available. We used a refined medication tracer algorithm to identify PD patients. We used mixed Poisson models to calculate the smoothed standardized incidence rates (SIRs) for each locality. We identified ACF and calculate the size and distance of the fields from each locality. We identified 3,792 cases of PD. SIRs were higher than expected in Jewish rural localities (median SIR [95% CI]: 1.41 [1.28; 1.53] in 2001-2004, 1.62 [1.48; 1.76] in 2005-2008, and 1.57 [1.44; 1.80] in 2009-2012). Highest SIR was observed in localities located in proximity to large ACF (SIR 1.54, 95% CI 1.32; 1.79). In conclusion, in this population based study we found that PD SIRs were higher than expected in rural localities. Furthermore, it appears that proximity to ACF and the field size contribute to PD risk.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.