SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Predicting motor, cognitive & functional impairment in Parkinson's.

Ann Clin Transl Neurol · 2019-07-26

DOI: 10.1002/acn3.50853PMID: 31402628

Open accessResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov't; research-article; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

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

ObjectiveWe recently demonstrated that 998 features derived from a simple 7-minute smartphone test could distinguish between controls, people with Parkinson's and people with idiopathic Rapid Eye Movement sleep behavior disorder, with mean sensitivity/specificity values of 84.6-91.9%. Here, we investigate whether the same smartphone features can be used to predict future clinically relevant outcomes in early Parkinson's.MethodsA total of 237 participants with Parkinson's (mean (SD) disease duration 3.5 (2.2) years) in the Oxford Discovery cohort performed smartphone tests in clinic and at home. Each test assessed voice, balance, gait, reaction time, dexterity, rest, and postural tremor. In addition, standard motor, cognitive and functional assessments and questionnaires were administered in clinic. Machine learning algorithms were trained to predict the onset of clinical outcomes provided at the next 18-month follow-up visit using baseline smartphone recordings alone. The accuracy of model predictions was assessed using 10-fold and subject-wise cross validation schemes.ResultsBaseline smartphone tests predicted the new onset of falls, freezing, postural instability, cognitive impairment, and functional impairment at 18 months. For all outcome predictions AUC values were greater than 0.90 for 10-fold cross validation using all smartphone features. Using only the 30 most salient features, AUC values greater than 0.75 were obtained.InterpretationWe demonstrate the ability to predict key future clinical outcomes using a simple smartphone test. This work has the potential to introduce individualized predictions to routine care, helping to target interventions to those most likely to benefit, with the aim of improving their outcome.

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.