We need to rethink outcomes in Parkinson’s disease research

Abstract

Over-reliance on symptom scales complicates the interpretation of research results for patients and clinicians. For future trials, it is crucial to prioritise primary outcomes that are relevant and understandable for patients The number of patients with Parkinson’s disease is increasing, and so is the complexity and variety of possible interventions.1 Interventions should be tested in clinical trials to ensure patients are offered the best treatment. Clinical trials typically focus on symptom scales to evaluate the effects of a proposed treatment. When symptom scales are prioritised, it is challenging to determine if a statistical difference translates to a meaningful difference for patients. Instead, researchers should prioritise hard outcomes that lead to findings easily understood by clinicians and patients, ultimately ensuring the most effective treatment. Parkinson’s disease is a neurological disorder with motor symptoms like bradykinesia, tremor, and rigidity, and non-motor symptoms, including insomnia, depression, and dementia, resulting in higher risks of falls, hospital admissions, and death.2 Several treatments are available to patients, and to make informed choices they need to …