Ladies (and guys, too!)
I know the secret to finding a major improvement in quality of life for people with Parkinson's who have depression. You simply cannot separate the two when in a study. Doesn't it make sense?

Let's say that you are in a clinical trial for a new agonist with your hypothesis to meet endpoints defined by the infamous UPDRS as one measure, patient diaries, neurological testing, and other familiar quality of life measures. How you perform on the movement performance testing is directly proportionate to your mood, or how you are feeling about yourself. If a control group of those with depression were weighed against those who had no signs of a mood disorder, I would be willing to wager high stakes that those with depression would not perform as well as those without the mood involvement.

Since we all pretty much acknowledge that mood affects movement, then why the heck don't we design the trial as if we believe it? I have been voicing this thought for some time now. I am convinced that this is why many trials fail to meet their endpoints. This must be factored into the statistical equation. Likewise on any given day if you are having a stressful period, don't take any outcome measures on that day. Wait until your frame of mind improves. I guarantee it will make a major difference.

Comments/discussion?

Peggy