NeuralCipher Research overview
The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by
BackgroundImpulsive-compulsive behaviours (ICB) are a potentially harmful group of behavioural symptoms among the nonmotor aspects of Parkinson's disease (PD).ObjectiveTo develop and perform partial validation of a Belgian-Flemish version of the Questionnaire for Impulsive-Compulsive Disorders in Parkinson's Disease (QUIP) as a screening instrument for ICB in PD patients.MethodsUsing a translation-backtranslation method, we developed a Belgian-Flemish version of the QUIP, which was subsequently completed by 88 PD patients. QUIP-positive patients were invited for a semistructured diagnostic interview.ResultsA positive QUIP score for one or more ICB was observed in 37 patients (41%). In 15 patients (17%), a positive QUIP score for one or more impulse control disorders (ICD) was noted: pathological gambling in 1, hypersexuality in 8, compulsive shopping in 5, and compulsive eating in 8 patients. A positive QUIP score for punding, hobbyism, and/or walkabout was observed in 30 patients. The semistructured diagnostic interview was performed in 22 QUIP-positive patients. The diagnosis of ICB was confirmed in 6 patients, suggesting a positive predictive value of 27% for the Belgian-Flemish version of the QUIP.ConclusionsWe have developed a Belgian-Flemish version of the QUIP, which can be used as a screening questionnaire for ICB in PD patients. Our data suggest that sensitivity is high, specificity is low, and validity of the questionnaire is similar to the original version. We confirm the necessity of additional clinical assessment of QUIP-positive patients to ascertain a diagnosis of ICB.
Scientific assessment
Research question
Assess the question within the original study’s scope.
Methods & sample
Check the source article for study design and sample details.
Key findings
An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.
Limitations
Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.
Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.