Disability in Parkinson’s disease is multidimensional and may involve limitations in mobility, balance, cognition, and activities of daily living. Clinical research addressing these domains includes pharmacological and non-pharmacological approaches; however, completed disability-related studies with publicly posted results in ClinicalTrials.gov have not been specifically characterized. The objective is to characterize completed disability-related Parkinson’s disease studies with posted results in ClinicalTrials.gov. A descriptive registry-based cross-sectional analysis of ClinicalTrials.gov was conducted. The registry was searched on July 28, 2026, using prespecified Parkinson’s disease and disability-related terms, and the search was restricted to completed studies with posted results. Study design, enrollment, clinical phase, intervention type, sponsorship, participant eligibility, methodological characteristics, and disability-related outcomes were extracted and descriptively analyzed. Interventional and observational studies were reported separately where applicable. Twelve eligible studies reporting a combined enrollment of 652 participants were identified, including eight (66.7%) interventional and four (33.3%) observational studies. Among the eight interventional studies, four (50.0%) evaluated pharmacological interventions, two (25.0%) evaluated behavioral interventions, and two (25.0%) evaluated device-based interventions. Mobility and gait were assessed in 8/12 (66.7%) studies, while motor function and balance/postural stability were each assessed in 6/12 (50.0%) studies. Pharmacological studies included levodopa-based therapies, pimavanserin, and flumazenil. Non-pharmacological studies included structured physical activity, cognitive rehabilitation, robotic walking assistance, and ankle-foot orthoses. This registry analysis identified a small, heterogeneous body of multimodal research addressing disability-related outcomes in Parkinson’s disease. The limited evidence base highlights important research gaps and the need for larger studies using standardized functional outcomes.