Richard G. Brown

Richard G. Brown

Auto-generated profile, based on publicly available information

Richard G. Brown

King's College London, UK

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

43Years (1984-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
31 May 2007 in Movement Disorders
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
MEMurat Emre
Murat Emre
DADag Aarsland
Dag Aarsland
RBRichard Brown
Richard Brown
DBDavid J. Burn
David J. Burn
CDCharles Duyckaerts
Charles Duyckaerts
BDBruno Dubois
Bruno Dubois
Dementia has been increasingly more recognized to be a common feature in patients with Parkinson's disease (PD), especially in old age. Specific criteria for the clinical diagnosis of dementia associated with PD (PD‐D), however, have been lacking. A Task Force, organized by the Movement Disorder Study, was charged with the development of clinical diagnostic criteria for PD‐D. The Task Force members were assigned to sub‐committees and performed a systematic review of the literature, based on pre‐defined selection criteria, in order to identify the epidemiological, clinical, auxillary, and pathological features of PD‐D. Clinical diagnostic criteria were then developed based on these findings and group consensus. The incidence of dementia in PD is increased up to six times, point‐prevelance is close to 30%, older age and akinetic‐rigid form are associated with higher risk. PD‐D is characterized by impairment in attention, memory, executive and visuo‐spatial functions, behavioral symptoms such as affective changes, hallucinations, and apathy are frequent. There are no specific ancillary investigations for the diagnosis; the main pathological correlate is Lewy body‐type degeneration in cerebral cortex and limbic structures. Based on the characteristic features associated with this condition, clinical diagnostic criteria for probable and possible PD‐D are proposed. © 2007 Movement Disorder Society

15 October 2007 in Movement Disorders
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
Kallol (K) Chaudhuri also Ray-ChaudhuriKallol (K) Chaudhuri also Ray-Chaudhuri
Kallol (K) Chaudhuri also Ray-Chaudhuri
PMPablo Martinez‐Martin
Pablo Martinez‐Martin
RBRichard G. Brown
Richard G. Brown
KSKapil Sethi
Kapil Sethi
FSFabrizio Stocchi
Fabrizio Stocchi
ASAnthony Schapira
Anthony Schapira

17 March 2006 in Movement Disorders
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
Kallol (K) Chaudhuri also Ray-ChaudhuriKallol (K) Chaudhuri also Ray-Chaudhuri
Kallol (K) Chaudhuri also Ray-Chaudhuri
PMPablo Martinez‐Martin
Pablo Martinez‐Martin
ASAnthony Schapira
Anthony Schapira
FSFabrizio Stocchi
Fabrizio Stocchi
KSKapil Sethi
Kapil Sethi
COCharles W. Olanow
Charles W. Olanow

15 December 2007 in Movement Disorders
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
BDBruno Dubois
Bruno Dubois
DBDavid Burn
David Burn
CGChristopher Goetz
Christopher Goetz
DADag Aarsland
Dag Aarsland
RBRichard G. Brown
Richard G. Brown
MEMurat Emre
Murat Emre
A preceding article described the clinical features of Parkinson's disease dementia (PD‐D) and proposed clinical diagnostic criteria for “probable” and “possible” PD‐D. The main focus of this article is to operationalize the diagnosis of PD‐D and to propose pratical guidelines based on a two level process depending upon the clinical scenario and the expertise of the evaluator involved in the assessment. Level I is aimed primarily at the clinician with no particular expertise in neuropsychological methods, but who requires a simple, pragmatic set of tests that are not excessively time‐consuming. Level I can be used alone or in concert with Level II, which is more suitable when there is the need to specify the pattern and the severity on the dementia of PD‐D for clinical monitoring, research studies or pharmacological trials. Level II tests can also be proposed when the diagnosis of PD‐D remains uncertain or equivocal at the end of a Level I evaluation. Given the lack of evidence‐based standards for some tests when applied in this clinical context, we have tried to make practical and unambiguous recommendations, based upon the available literature and the collective experience of the Task Force. We accept, however, that further validation of certain tests and modifications in the recommended cut off values will be required through future studies. © 2007 Movement Disorder Society

1 August 1995 in Brain
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
MJMarjan Jahanshahi
Marjan Jahanshahi
IJI. Harri Jenkins
I. Harri Jenkins
RBRichard G. Brown
Richard G. Brown
CMC. David Marsden
C. David Marsden
RPRichard E. Passingham
Richard E. Passingham
DBDavid Brooks
David Brooks
We investigated the functional anatomy of self-initiated and externally triggered movements. Six patients with Parkinson's disease off medication and six age-matched normals were assessed. All subjects had regional cerebral blood flow (rCBF) measurement with PET and recording of movement-related cortical potentials (MRPs) from frontal (F), frontocentral (FC), central (C) and parietal (P) sites to obtain measures of the Bereitschaftspotential (BP). The tasks were (i) self-initiated extension of the right index finger on average once every 3 s, (ii) externally triggered finger extension with the rate yoked to the self-initiated task, and (iii) rest condition with tones presented at a rate yoked with the self-initiated task. For the self-initiated movements, the amplitude of the early and peak BP were lower in Parkinson's disease relative to normals. For the externally triggered movements, the patients and the normals did not differ on any of the measures of cortical negativity prior to movement. For both groups, the late and peak BP components, but not the early component, had a lower amplitude in the externally triggered than the self-initiated movements. In normals, the left primary sensorimotor cortex, the supplementary motor area bilaterally, anterior cingulate, the lateral premotor cortex bilaterally, the insular cortex bilaterally, the left thalamus and the left putamen, parietal area 40 bilaterally and the right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) were significantly activated during the self-initiated movements relative to rest. For the normals, greater activation of the right DLPFC during the self-initiated movements was the only area that significantly differentiated them from the externally triggered movements. When Parkinson's disease patients and normals were compared for the self-initiated movements relative to rest, normals showed greater activation of the supplementary motor area and anterior cingulate, left putamen, left insular cortex, right DLPFC and right parietal area 40. When the groups were compared for the externally triggered movements relative to rest, the global pattern of blood flow and rCBF change in the two groups did not differ, confirming the absence of group differences in BPs for the externally triggered movements. During the self-initiated movements, the lower amplitude of the early BP in patients with Parkinson's disease as well as the under activation of the supplementary motor area relative to normals support the premises that (i) the supplementary motor area contributes to the early BP, and (ii) the deficit in self-initiated movements in Parkinson's disease is due to supplementary motor area underactivation. The DLPFC is activated in situations requiring non-routine decision making as in the self-initiated movements.

1 February 2004 in Journal of Psychosomatic Research
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
ADA.J Dittner
A.J Dittner
SWS.C Wessely
S.C Wessely
RBR.G Brown
R.G Brown