Landmark 167 · Research infrastructure

MDS clinical diagnostic criteria

In short

The Movement Disorder Society replaced the 1992 UK Brain Bank rules with criteria that add non-motor signs and two levels of certainty, giving trials a more reproducible way to say who has Parkinson's.

What it is
Research infrastructure
Outcome
Confirmed and built on
When
2015
Research lane
Trial methods & regulation
Last checked
20 Oct 2026

The research record

This is the project's file for this landmark, as written and checked. Sources are listed at the end; anything not yet confirmed is marked "Not yet verified".

Who

Ronald Postuma, Daniela Berg and 16 colleagues on behalf of the International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society (MDS Task Force). Movement Disorders 2015;30:1591–1601. Funder not recorded here.

What happened

The UK Brain Bank criteria (landmark 136) set the standard for 20 years. The new criteria were meant for clinical research but may also guide clinical diagnosis. Their stated benchmark is expert clinical diagnosis, and they aim to make the process reproducible across centres and usable by clinicians with less expertise.

  • Core. Parkinsonism, meaning bradykinesia plus rest tremor or rigidity.
  • Three layers. Absolute exclusion criteria (rule out), red flags (must be balanced), and supportive criteria (raise confidence).
  • Two levels. Clinically established PD (high specificity, lower sensitivity) and probable PD (balanced).
  • Non-motor signs. Non-motor features are built into the current criteria and, more fully, into separate criteria for prodromal Parkinson's (landmark 222). Loss of smell is listed among the supportive criteria (from secondary summaries; the full text was not read).

Why it moved us toward a cure

Trials that enrol people with other conditions, such as atypical parkinsonism, dilute any effect. A shared, written standard lets sites enrol the same kind of patient and makes failed trials easier to compare.

Outcome

Advanced. It supersedes the Brain Bank criteria for research. It is still clinical; biological definitions (landmark 28) are the next step.

Sources

  • Postuma et al., Mov Disord 2015;30:1591, doi:10.1002/mds.26424 (abstract via Europe PMC)
  • A 2025 review of autopsy-confirmed cases found data to support some items of the criteria but limited pathology studies (DOI 10.1038/s41531-025-01206-6, abstract only). Only linked comments on the 2015 paper; no correction or retraction found (Europe PMC, 20 Oct 2026).
  • Not yet verified: accuracy figures of the criteria against pathology; the exact supportive-criteria list (full text not read).

How it connects

Built on

Led to

See it on the research map

Report an error on this page

Back to top