SCIENTIFIC HUB

Araştırmanın izini sürün.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Parkinson Hastalığında Hasta Tarafından Bildirilen Sonuç Ölçümünün Doğrulanması.

Validation of a Patient-Reported Outcome Measure in Parkinson's Disease.

Makine çevirisi · Editoryal inceleme bekliyor

Nutrients · 2026-03-31

DOI: 10.3390/nu18071118PMID: 41978169

Open accessresearch-article; Validation Study; Journal ArticleKaynağa git ↗

Araştırma özeti

Aşağıdaki metin kaynak makalenin lisansı doğrulanmış orijinal özetidir. cc by

BackgroundThe Patient-Reported Outcomes in Parkinson's Disease (PRO-PD) scale is a 35-item visual analog measure designed to quantify symptom severity across motor and non-motor domains. Developed as a continuous, patient-centered outcome, PRO-PD captures patient-perceived change over time and is suitable for remote longitudinal assessment. This study evaluated the psychometric properties of PRO-PD across two independent datasets, including reliability, validity, factor structure, and minimal clinically important difference (MCID), and assessed its relevance to nutrition- and lifestyle-focused research.MethodsConvergent validity was evaluated in a cross-sectional clinical dataset (n = 46) using established clinician-rated and patient-reported instruments, including Hoehn and Yahr, Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS), Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire-39 (PDQ-39), Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), and PROMIS measures. Internal consistency, temporal stability, factor structure, and known-groups validity were assessed in a large remote-monitoring cohort (n = 2612). MCID thresholds were estimated in a longitudinal subsample (n = 390) using anchor-based methods, multinomial regression, and receiver operating characteristic analyses.ResultsPRO-PD demonstrated strong convergent validity with established clinical measures, excellent internal consistency (Cronbach's α = 0.93 (95% CI: 0.90-0.96) for Small Data and 0.95 (95% CI: 0.947-0.951) for Big Data"), and good test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.78 overall; 0.89 at 6 months). Confirmatory testing of a previously proposed eight-factor structure showed suboptimal fit, leading to a parsimonious four-factor solution (Neurobehavioral, Autonomic, Motor, Mood/Motivation) explaining 47.6% of variance. PRO-PD scores increased significantly with advancing disease duration and stage. MCID thresholds were +53.5 points for worsening and -78.5 points for improvement (AUC = 0.64 for worsened vs. not worsened; AUC = 0.71 for improved vs. worsened), with greater sensitivity for detecting deterioration than improvement. PRO-PD scores demonstrated sensitivity to patient-perceived symptom change over time, supporting its utility for longitudinal monitoring and potential application in lifestyle-focused intervention research.ConclusionsThese findings support PRO-PD as a psychometrically robust outcome measure that can be completed remotely without trained administrators.

Bilimsel değerlendirme

01

Araştırma sorusu

Sorunun kapsamı orijinal çalışma üzerinden değerlendirilir.

02

Yöntem ve örneklem

Çalışma tasarımı ve örneklem için kaynak makaleyi kontrol edin.

03

Temel bulgular

Bu kayıt için editoryal olarak onaylanmış bulgu özeti henüz yayımlanmadı.

04

Sınırlılıklar

Sonuçların genellenebilirliği, yanlılık ve klinik anlamı ayrıca incelenmelidir.

Bibliyografik veriden yöntem, örneklem veya klinik sonuç çıkarımı yapılmaz.