Parkinson's disease case ascertainment in a large prospective cohort.

Abstract

BackgroundIn epidemiologic studies where physician-based case adjudication is not feasible, Parkinson’s disease (PD) case ascertainment is often limited to self-reports which may not be accurate. We evaluated strategies to identify PD cases in the Agricultural Health Study (AHS).MethodsDoctor-diagnosed PD was self-reported on all cohort-wide surveys; potential cases were also identified from death certificates. Follow-up surveys asked about PD-related motor and non-motor symptoms. For PD confirmation, we collected additional diagnosis, symptom, and treatment data from 510 potential PD cases or their proxy (65% of those contacted) in a supplemental screener and obtained medical records for a subset (n = 65). We classified PD cases using established criteria and screener data.ResultsOf 510 potential PD cases, 75% were considered “probable” or “possible”; this proportion increased among participants diagnosed by a specialist (81.2%), taking PD medication (85.2%), or reporting ≥5 motor symptoms (86.8%) in a regular AHS survey. Of those with medical records, 93% (57 of 61) of probable or possible PD was confirmed. Never-smoking and non-motor and motor symptoms reported in prior AHS surveys were more common with probable/possible PD than unconfirmed PD.ConclusionIn this retrospective PD case ascertainment effort, we found that PD self-report with information on motor symptoms or medications may be a reasonable alternative for identifying PD cases when physician exam is not feasible. Because of intervening mortality, screeners could not be obtained from about one-third of those contacted. Thus, findings warrant replication.