Abstract
Several screening tools are available to assist general neurologists in the timely identification of patients with advanced Parkinson's disease (PD) who may be eligible for referral for a device-aided therapy (DAT). However, it should be noted that not all of these clinical decision rules have been developed and validated in a thorough and consistent manner. Furthermore, only a limited number of head-to-head comparisons have been performed. Available studies suggest that D-DATS has a higher positive predictive value and higher specificity than the 5-2-1 criteria, while the sensitivity of both screening tools is similar. However, unanswered questions remain regarding the validity of the decision rules, such as whether the diagnostic performance measures from validation studies are generalizable to other populations. Ultimately, the question is whether a screening tool will effectively and efficiently improve the quality of life of patients with PD. To address this key question, an impact analysis should be performed. The authors intend to set up a multinational cluster randomised controlled trial to compare the D-DATS and 5-2-1 criteria on the downstream consequences of implementing these screening tools, with a particular focus on the impact on disability and quality of life.