NeuralCipher Research overview
The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by
Background: Despite growing interest in the literature on Parkinson's disease (PD) on cognitive functioning, financial incompetence-a crucial aspect of daily living-and its modulation susceptibility by PD treatment regimens remains relatively understudied. Objective: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to synthesize existing evidence on how PD treatments affect financial capacity, assessing both direct financial competence and cognitive or behavioral proxies of financial decision-making. Methods: A comprehensive literature search according to PRISMA protocol was conducted across major biomedical databases, supplemented by gray literature and manual reference list checks. Eligible studies assessed financial capacity directly or indirectly through cognitive proxies (e.g., executive function, decision-making) or financial risk behaviors (e.g., impulse control disorders). Two separate meta-analyses were performed. Heterogeneity (I2), publication bias (Egger's test), and sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess robustness. Results: Twenty-three studies met inclusion criteria. One study directly measured financial capacity and was analyzed narratively, reporting diminished competence in patients on levodopa therapy. A meta-analysis of cognitive proxies (10 studies) showed a moderate effect size (Hedges' g = 0.70, 95% CI [0.45, 0.92], p p 2 = 45.8-60.5%) and potential publication bias (Egger's test p = 0.027) were noted. Conclusions: These findings suggest that PD treatments negatively impact financial decision-making both directly and indirectly through cognitive and behavioral pathways. Integrating financial decision-making assessments into PD care, particularly for patients on dopamine agonists, is recommended. Future research should prioritize longitudinal studies and standardized neuropsychological measures to guide clinical practice and optimize patient outcomes.
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.