Movement Disorders最新文献

{"title":"August Infographic","authors":"","doi":"10.1002/mds.29103","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/mds.29103","url":null,"abstract":"<p>\u0000 \u0000 <figure>\u0000 <div><picture>\u0000 <source></source></picture><p></p>\u0000 </div>\u0000 </figure>\u0000 August Infographic: Identification of Parkinson's Disease Subtypes from Resting-State Electroencephalography</p>","PeriodicalId":213,"journal":{"name":"Movement Disorders","volume":"38 8","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.6,"publicationDate":"2023-08-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/mds.29103","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"6117691","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Reply to ‘Comment on Martino et al. ‘Scales for Antipsychotic-Associated Movement Disorders: Systematic Review, Critique, and Recommendations’”","authors":"Davide Martino MD, PhD","doi":"10.1002/mds.29523","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/mds.29523","url":null,"abstract":"We thank Professor Loonen for the attention given to our article and the detailed critique. Movement disorders associated with antipsychotic drug exposure are among the most common conditions referred to movement disorders specialists, both in outpatient and inpatient settings. Hence, our subcommittee approached this work with longstanding clinical experience of the challenges in assessing these symptoms. Unlike what Loonen states, our article does not suggest replacing the term “dyskinesia” with “stereotypy” but, rather, to introduce in the nomenclature terms that indicate well-defined hyperkinetic phenomena. At present, “dyskinesia” is often used as a passepartout word that may encompass different phenomena, including stereotypies. Supporting the occurrence of new-onset antipsychoticassociated movement disorders in clinical trials, a proportion of which occur acutely, an overview and meta-analysis of Cochrane reviews that focused on acute parkinsonism, dystonia, akathisia, and tremor yielded, respectively, upper limits of prevalence estimate ranges of 29%, 15%, 16%, and 28%. As stated by Loonen, acute antipsychotic-associated dystonia and other movement disorders require rapid intervention. Rather than minimizing the need for rating instruments applicable also to acute movement disorders, the need for rapid treatment corroborates it. Furthermore, even if for some movement disorders (eg, akathisia) acute and tardive counterparts are phenomenologically similar, the need to intervene rapidly justifies swift and efficient rating of acute forms through the adaptation of preexisting instruments or even the development of new instruments. We were surprised to read Professor Loonen’s concerns around the quality of article selection. Both publications on the validation study of the Schedule for the Assessment of Drug-Induced Movement Disorders (SADIMoD) as well as the study by Knol and colleagues were cited in the supplementary file of our article (see references 73, 74, and 64 in that document), which contains a detailed analysis of each rating instrument. The criteria for recommendations that we used are those adopted in several publications commissioned by the International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society Clinical Outcome Assessments Scientific Evaluation Committee. The “suggested” recommendation for the SADIMoD stems from its not having been applied by authors different from its developers, the length of administration, and some limitations of its psychometric profile. Regarding the comment on the Abnormal Involuntary Movements Scale, again we express clearly in the supplementary file that the total severity is conventionally the sum of the scores of items 1 to 7 and refer to the publication of supplementary instructions to score the first seven items. Its widespread use in psychiatric patients and acceptable psychometric properties justified our recommendation. We also agree on some important limitations, such as limited internal consistenc","PeriodicalId":213,"journal":{"name":"Movement Disorders","volume":"38 8","pages":"1566-1567"},"PeriodicalIF":8.6,"publicationDate":"2023-08-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"6186217","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Reply to: “Non-GAA Repeat Expansions in FGF-14 Are Likely Not Pathogenic”","authors":"Paula Saffie Awad MD,&nbsp;Christine Klein MD","doi":"10.1002/mds.29551","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/mds.29551","url":null,"abstract":"tion of data, drafting or revising the manuscript for intellectual content. Bernard Brais: acquisition of data, drafting or revising the manuscript for intellectual content. Nazlı A. Başak: design or conceptualization of the study, acquisition of data, analysis or interpretation of data, drafting or revising the manuscript for intellectual content. Henry Houlden: design or conceptualization of the study, acquisition of data, analysis or interpretation of data, drafting or revising the manuscript for intellectual content.","PeriodicalId":213,"journal":{"name":"Movement Disorders","volume":"38 8","pages":"1577-1578"},"PeriodicalIF":8.6,"publicationDate":"2023-08-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"6186219","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Reply to Letter to the Editor: “Disease Progression in Multiple System Atrophy: The Value of Clinical Cohorts with Long Follow-Up”","authors":"Lars Lau Raket PhD,&nbsp;Ingeborg Helbech Hansen PhD,&nbsp;Line Kühnel PhD,&nbsp;Daniel Oudin ?str?m PhD,&nbsp;Anna-Karin Berger PhD,&nbsp;Florian Krismer PhD,&nbsp;Gregor K. Wenning PhD,&nbsp;Klaus Seppi MD,&nbsp;Werner Poewe MD,&nbsp;José Luis Molinuevo MD, PhD","doi":"10.1002/mds.29535","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/mds.29535","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;p&gt;We are pleased to read the letter by Saulnier and colleagues related to our article “Disease Progression in Multiple System Atrophy—Novel Modeling Framework and Predictive Factors,”&lt;span&gt;&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/span&gt; and we thank the authors for the impressive work they have done to replicate and expand on our research in a larger and more contemporary cohort.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;As Saulnier and colleagues rightly point out, our study relied on a cohort of 121 patients with a relatively advanced disease stage and a limited follow-up period of 2 years. We acknowledge these limitations and fully agree on the importance of both larger sample size and longer individual follow-up duration for achieving high-quality estimates of the natural history disease trajectory in multiple system atrophy (MSA).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The authors’ replication of our disease progression modeling using the larger French MSA cohort of 663 patients with a follow-up period of up to 11 years estimated a longer duration of the MSA progression trajectory compared to our findings. Although differences between the cohorts were limited in terms of average baseline disease severity and symptom duration (5.4 years in the European MSA study cohort vs. 4.5 years in the French MSA cohort), some differences are to be expected due to other cohort differences (years in which the study was ongoing, study locations, etc.). Interestingly, the authors explored how restricting longitudinal follow-up data to 2.5 years affected the estimates. The authors found that restricting samples resulted in a compressed trajectory with smaller interpatient differences compared to using long-term follow-up data. Based on these findings, Saulnier and colleagues suggest that studies of restricted follow-up time could overestimate progression rate and underestimate interpatient differences, which we agree may be the case. Our disease progression model performs temporal recalibration on a latent timescale, which requires a trade-off between the (vertical) deviation from the estimated mean trajectory and the (horizontal) deviation on the timescale. The trade-off is determined in a fully data-driven approach based on the maximum likelihood principle. When long-term patterns are not sufficiently clear in individual patient-level trajectories, the model may prioritize minimization of vertical differences over estimating temporal patterns. One aspect of the estimation that was not addressed by Saulnier and colleagues is the role of multiple outcome measures. In our study, we aligned patient samples using six different outcome measures, whereas only two outcome measures were used for replication in the French MSA cohort. Including a greater number of disease-relevant measures increases the number of observed data points per patient used to predict their latent disease time, which could possibly alleviate some of the issues related to shorter-term follow-up.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;This replication study based on the French MSA cohort underscores the importance of lo","PeriodicalId":213,"journal":{"name":"Movement Disorders","volume":"38 8","pages":"1569-1570"},"PeriodicalIF":8.6,"publicationDate":"2023-08-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/mds.29535","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"6066595","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Variability in the Accuracy of Clinical Diagnosis of Early Parkinson's Disease","authors":"Sasivimol Virameteekul MD, MSc,&nbsp;Eduardo de Pablo-Fernández MD, PhD","doi":"10.1002/mds.29553","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/mds.29553","url":null,"abstract":"their previous work although, in contrast to routine practice data from our study, their data are based on research-devoted assessments, 4 so their results may be more representative of diagnostic accuracy in research settings. Differences in sample size, type of assessment (routine practice vs. research-devoted), cohort (brain bank vs. population-based)","PeriodicalId":213,"journal":{"name":"Movement Disorders","volume":"38 8","pages":"1574-1575"},"PeriodicalIF":8.6,"publicationDate":"2023-08-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"6186220","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Disease Progression in Multiple System Atrophy: The Value of Clinical Cohorts with Long Follow-Up","authors":"Tiphaine Saulnier MS,&nbsp;Margherita Fabbri MD, PhD,&nbsp;Anne Pavy-Le Traon MD, PhD,&nbsp;Mélanie Le Goff MS,&nbsp;Catherine Helmer PhD,&nbsp;Patrice Péran PhD,&nbsp;Wassilios G. Meissner MD, PhD,&nbsp;Olivier Rascol MD, PhD,&nbsp;Alexandra Foubert-Samier MD, PhD,&nbsp;Cécile Proust-Lima PhD","doi":"10.1002/mds.29534","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/mds.29534","url":null,"abstract":"<p>In their recent publication, Kühnel et al<span>¹</span> described the progression of multiple system atrophy (MSA) in the European MSA study group (EMSA-SG) cohort via an innovative disease progression model (DPM). DPMs are valuable longitudinal methods to describe MSA natural history while accounting for data uncertainty (delayed diagnosis, uncertain timing, heterogeneous staging).<span>²</span> The mean trajectories of clinical progression are described along the homogeneous disease continuum (Fig. 1C) rather than the observed time since diagnosis (Fig. 1A) thanks to a temporal recalibration of progression according to an individual latent disease time, anchored to MSA disease stage at inclusion.</p><p>The population characteristics and the length of individual follow-up are critical in natural history studies and DPMs. Kühnel's study relied on 121 patients with rather advanced stage, outdated diagnosis criteria, and short follow-up of 2 years.<span>^{1, 3}</span> We replicated Kühnel's analysis on repeated Unified MSA Rating Scale sum scores I (activities of daily living) and II (motor examination) from the French MSA cohort<span>⁴</span> (663 patients) with maximum follow-up of 11 years, consensus diagnosis criteria,<span>⁵</span> and early stages at entry (see Supplementary Material Data S1 for details). MSA progression spanned a larger period than in the original paper (Fig. 1C) with mean time gaps at inclusion estimated at 3.6 and 9.1 years for moderately-dependent and helpless patients at inclusion, respectively (Fig. 1B right panels); and significant inter-patient differences (SD = 2.14 years). When restricting the sample to 2.5-year follow-up, these differences were smaller, especially among the most aggressively affected patients at entry, with estimates of 2.5 and 6.6 years (Fig. 1B left panels) and smaller inter-patient differences (SD = 0.79 years). This suggests that studies restricted to short-term follow-up overestimate the progression rate and underestimate inter-patient differences.</p><p>When applying DPMs, differences across stages should be carefully interpreted. They do not quantify the expected amount of time spent in each stage by a patient, but the time gap between patients entering the study at different stages. Estimating the duration spent in each disability stage requires specific modeling of disability over time.</p><p>T.S.: 1A, 1B, 1C, 2A, 2B, 3A</p><p>M.F.: 2C, 3B</p><p>A.P.L.: 2C, 3B</p><p>M.L.: 2C, 3B</p><p>C.H.: 2C, 3B</p><p>P.P.: 2C, 3B</p><p>W.G.M.: 2C, 3B</p><p>O.R.: 2C, 3B</p><p>A.F.S.: 1A, 1B, 2A, 2C, 3A</p><p>C.P.L.: 1A, 1B, 2A, 2C, 3A</p>","PeriodicalId":213,"journal":{"name":"Movement Disorders","volume":"38 8","pages":"1567-1569"},"PeriodicalIF":8.6,"publicationDate":"2023-08-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/mds.29534","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"6186222","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Comment on “Summing MDS-UPDRS Parts 1 + 2 (Nonmotor and Motor Experience of Daily Living): The Patient's Voice”","authors":"Norbert Kovács MD, DSc,&nbsp;Zsuzsanna Aschermann MD, PhD,&nbsp;Márk Harmat MD,&nbsp;Mirtill Rohonczi MD,&nbsp;József Janszky MD, DSc,&nbsp;Dávid Pintér MD, PhD","doi":"10.1002/mds.29512","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/mds.29512","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;p&gt;We read with great interest the article by Zou and colleagues titled “Summing MDS-UPDRS Parts 1 + 2 (Nonmotor and Motor Experience of Daily Living): The Patient's Voice.”&lt;span&gt;&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/span&gt; In the past few years, the Movement Disorder Society–sponsored revision of the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS),&lt;span&gt;&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/span&gt; developed according to clinimetric guidelines and validated in several languages,&lt;span&gt;&lt;sup&gt;3&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/span&gt; has become an integral part of clinical practice and research. Although until recently the development team had recommended separate scoring of the four parts of the scale, in clinical practice it seemed a logical step to combine some parts into a composite score.&lt;span&gt;&lt;sup&gt;4&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/span&gt; In addition to the total score, such a measure could be a composite score measuring activities of daily living of the patients as defined by motor and nonmotor symptoms (summation of parts 1 + 2) or a composite scale measuring the severity of movement-related symptoms and their impact on activities of daily living (summing up parts 2 + 3). However, the use of composite scores may be implicit, and the development team has so far recommended a strictly separate assessment of each part of the score.&lt;span&gt;&lt;sup&gt;1, 2&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/span&gt; This approach to separate assessment of the subscales is fundamentally changed by the new US Food and Drug Administration guidance, which prioritizes the integration of patient opinion into an objective measure.&lt;span&gt;&lt;sup&gt;5&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/span&gt; According to this new perspective, the authors of the referenced article propose basically two types of integration summarizing parts 1 + 2 and 1B + 2.&lt;span&gt;&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/span&gt; They consider that both are in line with the criteria for clinimetric methods.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;In our comment, we draw attention to the fact that the usefulness of these composite calculations seems to be justified by the application of other techniques. Because the calculated scores are used not only to characterize the degree of severity or disability but also to assess changes over time, progression or the effectiveness of the therapeutic response, it is of high importance that the newly developed composite scales track these changes well and a reliable metric found to assess improvement or deterioration that highlights clinical significance.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Minimal clinically important differences (MCID) are defined as the smallest cutoff values that can separate clinically relevant changes from clinically unimportant or negligible changes. MCID cutoff values are typically asymmetric, that is, the cutoff value for the smallest clinically relevant improvement and the smallest clinically relevant worsening on a given scale is not always the same. In 2017, our workgroup attempted to define MCID cutoffs for the MDS-UPDRS Experiences of Daily Living Parts.&lt;span&gt;&lt;sup&gt;6&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/span&gt; Our work demonstrated that the MCID can be calculated not only separately for parts 1 and 2 but also reliably for the 1 + 2","PeriodicalId":213,"journal":{"name":"Movement Disorders","volume":"38 8","pages":"1563-1564"},"PeriodicalIF":8.6,"publicationDate":"2023-08-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/mds.29512","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"6066623","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Prevalence and Incidence of Huntington's Disease","authors":"Mark Strong PhD, CStat,&nbsp;Oliver W. Quarrell MD, FRCP","doi":"10.1002/mds.29532","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/mds.29532","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;p&gt;We read with interest the updated review of the epidemiology of Huntington's disease (HD) by Medina et al.&lt;span&gt;&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/span&gt; In their article, the authors present results from a series of meta-analyses of prevalence and incidence studies conducted in populations in Africa, Asia, Europe, and the Americas between 2011 and 2022. Worldwide pooled estimates are reported for prevalence and incidence, along with separate pooled incidence estimates for each continent where there was more than a single study. In each case, estimates were derived from a random-effects meta-analysis.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;As is common in systematic reviews of prevalence and incidence, the included studies are heterogeneous in terms of their methodology, data source, and population. For example, whereas the majority of studies in the review reported prevalence and incidence for all ages, Gavrielov-Yusim et al&lt;span&gt;&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/span&gt; provided results only for those ≥18 years and Evans et al&lt;span&gt;&lt;sup&gt;3&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/span&gt; only for those ≥21 years. These two studies derived their estimates from administrative and research databases, whereas Kounidas et al&lt;span&gt;&lt;sup&gt;4&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/span&gt; used genetic laboratory, clinic, and hospital records. These differences in population and data source matter; the epidemiology of HD in children and adolescents is not the same as in adults, and different data sources are derived from populations with different disease risk.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Significant heterogeneity in a meta-analysis results in pooled estimates that are difficult to interpret, and this is very much the case here. The pooled prevalence and incidence estimates reported by Medina et al&lt;span&gt;&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/span&gt; do not in any meaningful sense represent the prevalence or incidence in a defined population. However, this is exactly how the pooled estimates reported in a previous meta-analysis study&lt;span&gt;&lt;sup&gt;5&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/span&gt; have been used.&lt;span&gt;&lt;sup&gt;6-9&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;This misinterpretation is made even more likely due to an error in the reporting of the key measures of study heterogeneity, &lt;i&gt;Q&lt;/i&gt; (which follows a χ&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt; distribution and therefore allows us to test the significance of the heterogeneity) and &lt;i&gt;I&lt;/i&gt;&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt;. The values of &lt;i&gt;Q&lt;/i&gt; and &lt;i&gt;I&lt;/i&gt;&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt; reported in tables 1 and 2 of Medina et al&lt;span&gt;&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/span&gt; suggest that heterogeneity is very small or absent. However, this is not actually the case. Unfortunately, the software that the authors used, &lt;i&gt;Comprehensive Meta-Analysis Software&lt;/i&gt;, rather confusingly reports a “&lt;i&gt;Q&lt;/i&gt;* statistic” (along with an &lt;i&gt;I&lt;/i&gt;&lt;sup&gt;\u0000 &lt;i&gt;2&lt;/i&gt;&lt;/sup&gt; value calculated from this value of &lt;i&gt;Q&lt;/i&gt;*), which should be used “&lt;i&gt;only&lt;/i&gt; for the analysis of variance, to partition &lt;i&gt;Q&lt;/i&gt;* into its various components,” and it is these values that appear in the article. The software authors note that these statistics are not measures of heterogeneity and state that “[r]ather, the &lt;i&gt;Q&lt;/i&gt; statistic computed using &lt;i&gt;fixed-e","PeriodicalId":213,"journal":{"name":"Movement Disorders","volume":"38 8","pages":"1570-1572"},"PeriodicalIF":8.6,"publicationDate":"2023-08-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/mds.29532","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"6117690","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Movement Disorders: Volume 38, Number 8, August 2023","authors":"","doi":"10.1002/mds.29102","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/mds.29102","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":213,"journal":{"name":"Movement Disorders","volume":"38 8","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.6,"publicationDate":"2023-08-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/mds.29102","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"6199131","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Reply to Letter to the Editor: Prevalence and Incidence of Huntington's Disease Comment on Medina et al. (2022)","authors":"Tamara Pringsheim MD","doi":"10.1002/mds.29528","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/mds.29528","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":213,"journal":{"name":"Movement Disorders","volume":"38 8","pages":"1572-1573"},"PeriodicalIF":8.6,"publicationDate":"2023-08-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"6086751","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}