This page is alzhub.org's plain-English summary of a published study, not the paper itself. It is generated from the record we hold for this study, sourced and linked below — check the original for the full text and methods.

52/100

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 52 out of 100. Getting a diagnosis

Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies

Plain-language summary

The correct diagnosis of Parkinson's disease is important for prognostic and therapeutic reasons and is essential for clinical research. Investigations of the diagnostic accuracy for the disease and other forms of parkinsonism in community-based samples of patients taking antiparkinsonian medication confirmed a diagnosis of parkinsonism in only 74% of patients and clinically probable Parkinson's disease in 53% of patients. Clinicopathological studies based on brain bank material from the UK and Canada have shown that clinicians diagnose the disease incorrectly in about 25% of patients. In these studies, the most common reasons for misdiagnosis were presence of essential tremor, vascular parkinsonism, and atypical parkinsonian syndromes. Infrequent diagnostic errors included Alzheimer's disease, dementia with Lewy bodies, and drug-induced parkinsonism. Increasing knowledge of the heterogeneous clinical presentation of the various parkinsonisms has resulted in improved diagnostic accuracy of the various parkinsonian syndromes in specialised movement-disorder units. Also genetic testing and various other ancillary tests, such as olfactory testing, MRI, and dopamine-transporter single-photon-emission computed-tomography imaging, help with clinical diagnostic decisions.

What this study adds

Evidence grade: Low

This is a narrative review. This paper reports that clinicians misdiagnose Parkinson's disease in about 25% of patients in brain bank studies, with essential tremor, vascular parkinsonism and atypical parkinsonian syndromes as common reasons. It concerns diagnosis of Parkinson's disease and offers nothing on treating, curing or preventing Alzheimer's disease.

Taken from this record’s own fields, not from reading the paper. The grade is assigned from the abstract’s wording; what that means.

Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris

APA 7th

Tolosa, E., Wenning, G., & Poewe, W. (2006). The diagnosis of Parkinson's disease. The Lancet. Neurology. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1474-4422(05)70285-4

Vancouver

Tolosa E, Wenning G, Poewe W. The diagnosis of Parkinson's disease. The Lancet. Neurology. 2006. doi:10.1016/s1474-4422(05)70285-4. PMID: 16361025.

BibTeX

@article{tolosa2006-16361025,
  author  = {Tolosa, E. and Wenning, G. and Poewe, W.},
  title   = {{The diagnosis of Parkinson's disease}},
  journal = {The Lancet. Neurology},
  year    = {2006},
  doi     = {10.1016/s1474-4422(05)70285-4},
  pmid    = {16361025},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1016/s1474-4422(05)70285-4}
}

Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

How to read this study

Design: this is a narrative review. It summarises a field without a fixed search method, so it shows how authors read the evidence rather than measuring it. Use it to find the primary studies, not as a result in itself.
Size: the record gives no participant count. Look for one in the original before trusting a pattern.
Effect: the record gives no effect size, so the summary above cannot say how large any difference was.

What the evidence grade means here

This page is graded low. alzhub.org assigns the grade automatically from keywords in the abstract, not from reading the paper. Low means the abstract matched neither pattern. It is the default label, and it does not mean the work is poor; many sound lab and imaging papers land here. It can add at most 5 of the 100 points in the study score, and it is a label about design, not a verdict on whether the findings are true.

New to reading papers? Six questions to ask of any Alzheimer’s study · how we score.

Key findings

Clinicopathological studies based on brain bank material from the UK and Canada have shown that clinicians diagnose the disease incorrectly in about 25% of patients.

Why it matters

This paper reports that clinicians misdiagnose Parkinson's disease in about 25% of patients in brain bank studies, with essential tremor, vascular parkinsonism and atypical parkinsonian syndromes as common reasons. It concerns diagnosis of Parkinson's disease and offers nothing on treating, curing or preventing Alzheimer's disease.

New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Getting a diagnosis →

Study details

Evidence strengthLow

How this study scored 52/100

Published in a leading specialty journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people and randomized / blinded because the record does not state it.

Component	Points	Why
Journal tier	9 / 10	Tier 2 — leading specialty journal (The Lancet. Neurology)
Journal's citation record	3 / 4	The Lancet Neurology: journal h-index 457 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29)
Study design	0 / 12	No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Strength of evidence	1 / 5	Rated “low” in our summary
Peer-review validation	10 / 10	Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal.
How recent	1 / 5	2006 — older than 20 years, still counted
Sample size	0 / 4	Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Effect reported	0 / 3	No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Studied in people	0 / 3	Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Randomized / blinded	0 / 2	No randomization or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Times cited	6 / 7	Cited 903 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10)
Citations per year	4 / 5	41.0 citations a year over 22 year(s) since 2006
Impact for its field and year	4 / 6	Cited 10.7× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI)
Cited by studies here	2 / 6	Cited by 9 other studies in this library
Still being cited	3 / 4	Cited 189 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex)
Senior author's track record	4 / 4	Last-listed author Werner H Poewe: h-index 153 (OpenAlex, whole career)
Institution's track record	1 / 3	Universitat de Barcelona: institution h-index 1,049 (OpenAlex)
Multicenter collaboration	2 / 3	OpenAlex lists 4 institution(s) in 2 countries
Indexed in PubMed	2 / 2	Indexed in PubMed (PMID 16361025)
Free to read	0 / 2	Behind a paywall — scores zero
Total	52 / 100	—

What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →

Read the original

May need a subscription OpenAlex found no free copy of the full text (checked 6 Feb 1020), so the publisher may charge for it. The PubMed abstract is free.

Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.

Studies this one cites

Referenced by this study and also in the alzhub library, so you can read them here. Showing 12 of 17.

Later studies that cite this one

9 studies in the alzhub library list this one in their references. Showing the 8 highest-scoring.

Related studies in Getting a diagnosis from nearby years

Also tagged “lewy”

1,017 studies in the library carry the topic tag “lewy”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 1,017 tagged studies.

Studies sharing this one's topic tags

Similar studies

More on Getting a diagnosis

See all studies in Getting a diagnosis →