Skip to main content
. 2023 Oct 24;15:1254824. doi: 10.3389/fnagi.2023.1254824

Table 1.

The baseline characteristics of the included studies.

No. First author Region Study design Sample size (male/female) Age Disease duration (year) Duration of levodopa usage (year) Score
PD Control group PD Control group
1 Li et al. (2020) China case–control study 322 (186/136) 214 (108/106) 64.5 ± 8.5 63.8 ± 9.3 NA NA 7
2 Chen et al. (2015) China cross-sectional study 60 (34/26) 50 (27/23) 63.1 ± 10.6 55.6 ± 10.8 NA NA 8
3 Ozer et al. (2006) turkey cross-sectional study 39 (25/14) 28 (15/13) 67.0 ± 9.3 61.9 ± 8.3 6.4 ± 3.9 4.4 ± 3.5 8
4 Triantafyllou et al. (2008) Athens cross-sectional study 111 (65/46) 93 (NA) 70.1 ± 8.0 69.6 ± 8.1 5.9 ± 3.9 NA 7
5 Zoccolella et al. (2009) Italy cross-sectional study 121 (72/49) 154 (97/57) 67.8 ± 8.0 68.7 ± 8.8 NA ≥ 1-y 8
6 Zoccolella et al. (2005) Italy case–control study 45 (27/18) 15 (NA) 61.3 ± 9.0 61 ± 10.4 10.4 ± 6.2 NA 9
7 Lamberti et al. (2005) Italy case–control study 46 (33/13) 32 (22/10) 63.7 ± 8.9 64.5 ± 11.5 10.8 ± 5.0 7.2 ± 4.8 7
8 Triantafyllou et al. (2007) Athens case–control study 67 (37/30) 67 (NA) 69.9 ± 5.3 NA 7.3 ± 3.4 YES 6
9 Saadat et al. (2018) Babol cross-sectional and case–control study 100 (53/47) 100 (50/50) NA NA NA NA 5
10 Białecka et al. (2012) Poland case–control study 320 (164/156) 254 (136/118) 64.4 ± 10.1 64.8 ± 9.6 6.8 ± 5.2 YES 8
11 Ojo et al. (2011) South western Nigeria cross-sectional study 40 (32/8) 40 (32/8) 65.8 ± 9.8 63.3 ± 10.8 5.4 ± 0.81 NA 8
12 Caccamo et al. (2007) Italy case–control study 49 (22/27) 86 (40/46) 64.2 ± 7.5 64.1 ± 7.1 5.8 ± 4.1 4.8 ± 3.4 9
13 Camicioli et al. (2009) Canada cross-sectional study 51 (30/21) 50 (29/21) 71.5 ± 4.7 71.6 ± 4.9 8.74 ± 4.4 YES 8
14 Gorgone et al. (2012) Italy case–control study 60 (27/33) 82 (37/45) 64.5 ± 7.7 64.1 ± 7.2 NA ≥ 1-y 8
15 Lee et al. (2010) Korea cross-sectional study 96 (42/53) 285 (126/159) 67.6 ± 6.0 67.6 ± 6.0 5.7 ± 2.7 3.3 ± 1.7 7
16 Religa et al. (2006) Poland case–control study 114 (NA) 100 (NA) 70.0 ± 7.6 71.2 ± 6.0 5.5 ± 4.0 4.8 ± 10.4 9
17 Rodriguez-Oroz et al. (2009) Spain cross-sectional study 89 (52/37) 30 (16/14) 71.7 ± 6.4 68.5 ± 3.0 14.3 ± 4.4 YES 8
18 Sapkota et al. (2014) Canada cross-sectional study 46 (26/20) 49 (28/21) 70.8 ± 4.3 71.6 ± 4.0 8.42 ± 4.51 4.78 ± 4.18 8
19 Shin and Sohn (2009) Korea case–control study 33 (10/23) 41 (12/29) 63.5 ± 7.8 65.4 ± 7.8 ≥ 3-y ≥ 3-y 8
20 Sławek et al. (2013) Poland cross-sectional study 192 (101/91) 184 (114/70) 63.7 ± 9.4 65.4 ± 9.2 6.8 ± 5.3 NA 8
21 Song et al. (2013) Korea cross-sectional study 61 (26/35) 48 (11/37) 68.3 ± 7.0 66.2 ± 11.8 3.0 ± 2.4 2.7 ± 2.5 7
22 Todorović et al. (2006) Serbia case–control study 113 (63/50) 53 (34/19) 61.1 ± 9.1 60.8 ± 13.1 3.1 ± 2.5 YES 7
23 Yuan et al. (2009) China-Taiwan case–control study 76 (28/48) 110 (37/73) 71.4 ± 9.8 69.9 ± 8.5 5.0 ± 4.0 6.2 ± 4.3 8
24 Wei et al. (2016) China cross-sectional study 17 (11/6) 85 (55/30) 71.0 ± 15.4 70.7 ± 12.1 NA NA 6
25 Zou et al. (2018) China cross-sectional study 92 (49/47) 80 (44/36) 65.7 ± 11.2 64.4 ± 7.1 4.1 ± 3.4 YES 7

NA: not available.