Skip to main content
. 2019 Jul 8;1(1):fcz006. doi: 10.1093/braincomms/fcz006

Table 2.

Clinical characteristics and scanning modalities of included studies of Parkinson’s hallucinations

First author Modality N PDVH N PD Age PDVH Age PD MMSE PDVH MMSE PD H&Y PDVH H&Y PD UPDRS PDVH UPDRS PD
Total n = 168 Total n = 234
(27) Boeckerb FDG-PET 8 11 72.88 70.56 25.75 26.82 46.25 32.73
(28) Gasca-Salasb FDG-PET 9 12 70.7 70.8 27 25.9 16.1 17
(29) Goldmanb VBM 25 25 75.4 74.8 25.1 23.9 3 3 43.5 39
(30) Leeb VBM 10 21 69.4 66.2 27.6 28.2 2.2 1.8 22.5 16.4
(31) Oishi SPECT 24 41 69.5 68.6 25.1 26.5 3.3 3
(32) Pagonobarragab VBM 15 27 64.1 66.3 135a 136a 1.9 1.9 21.7 18.6
(33) Ramirez-Ruis VBM 18 20 27 29.1 3.2 2.5 29.3 24.5
(34) Shinb VBM 46 64 71.3 70.7 25.2 25.7 24.1 21.6
(35) Watanabeb VBM 13 13 66.6 63.6 27.9 90 2.9 2.4 23.4 28.6
Summary (mean (SD)) 19 (12) 26 (17) 70.0 (4) 68.9 (3.5) 26.3 (1) 26.9 (2) 2.8 (0.6) 2.4 (0.5) 28.8 (11) 24.8 (8)
a

Matis dementia rating supplied.

b

Indicates established criteria were used to define PD hallucinations.

FDG-PET, fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography; MMSE, mini-mental state examination; PDVH, Parkinson’s disease with visual hallucinations; SPECT, single photon emission computed tomography; UPDRS, unified parkinson's disease rating scale score (part III, motor); VBM, voxel-based morphometry.

No significant differences between groups for any of these comparisons.