SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Cognitive changes preceding Parkinson's disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective population-based studies.

Front Aging Neurosci · 2025-10-07

DOI: 10.3389/fnagi.2025.1627221PMID: 41127242

Open accessSystematic Review; systematic-review; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

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

IntroductionVarious non-motor symptoms have been studied as part of the prodromal phase of Parkinson's disease (PD). However, studies assessing cognitive changes are scarce.MethodsWe systematically searched PubMed and SCOPUS to identify prospective, population-based studies that reported on cognitive performance in individuals without PD at baseline, the incidence of PD at follow-up, and comparisons of cognitive performance between participants who developed PD and controls.ResultsTwelve studies were identified, including a total of 524,807 participants, of whom 2,939 developed PD. Four studies found differences in global cognition and a meta-analysis showed that individuals who developed PD scored 0.3 points lower than controls on the Mini-Mental State Examination at baseline. Cognitive changes were most frequently observed in tests of executive function, processing-speed and attention, and less frequently in visuospatial/visuoconstructive skills and memory. Due to the heterogeneity of the assessment methods used, it was not possible to conduct further meta-analyses.ConclusionsCognitive changes may be part of the clinical picture in prodromal PD cohorts derived from the general population. Further population-based studies with large samples and long-term follow-up are needed to better understand their extent and significance.Systematic review registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD42024547252, identifier: CRD42024547252.

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.