SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Incidence of Parkinson disease in North America.

NPJ Parkinsons Dis · 2022-12-15

DOI: 10.1038/s41531-022-00410-yPMID: 36522332

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

Parkinson disease (PD) is the second most common age-related neurodegenerative condition diagnosed in North America. We recently demonstrated, using multiple epidemiological data sources, that the prevalence of PD diagnoses was greater than previously reported and currently used for clinical, research, and policy decision-making. Prior PD incidence estimates have varied, for unclear reasons. There is a need for improved estimates of PD incidence, not only for care delivery planning and future policy but also for increasing our understanding of disease risk. The objective of this study was thus to investigate the incidence of Parkinson disease across five epidemiological cohorts in North America in a common year, 2012. The cohorts contained data on 6.7 million person-years of adults ages 45 and older, and 9.3 million person-years of adults ages 65 and older. Our estimates of age-sex-adjusted incidence of PD ranged from 108 to 212 per 100,000 among persons ages 65 and older, and from 47 to 77 per 100,00 among persons ages 45 and older. PD incidence increased with age and was higher among males. We also found persistent spatial clustering of incident PD diagnoses in the U.S. PD incidence estimates varied across our data sources, in part due to case ascertainment and diagnosis methods, but also possibly due to the influence of population factors (prevalence of genetic risk factors or protective markers) and geographic location (exposure to environmental toxins). Understanding the source of these variations will be important for health care policy, research, and care planning.

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.