Parkinson's through a cultural lens: Diversity in disease expression and care

Abstract

Living and care experiences with Parkinson's disease (PD) vary widely across cultures. Global heterogeneity in PD disease expression is increasingly recognized, shaped by differences in genetic backgrounds, environmental exposures, socioeconomic conditions, and access to healthcare resources. Cultural beliefs, levels of health literacy, and stigma play a critical role in shaping how individuals perceive their illness and influence when and how they seek medical care, their trust in healthcare providers, acceptance of diagnosis, and adherence to recommended treatments. Stigma—both internalized and externally imposed—can lead to social withdrawal, delayed help-seeking, and reduced quality of life. Caregiving experiences are likewise deeply influenced by sociocultural norms, including collectivist versus individualist value systems, gendered expectations, and familial structures, all of which affect the distribution of caregiving responsibilities and perceived caregiver burden. These cultural and structural dimensions contribute to marked disparities in diagnosis, treatment, and long-term support for PD across different populations. To address these inequities, clinical care models must be reoriented to incorporate cultural competence training for healthcare providers, locally tailored public education campaigns to combat stigma, and the development of culturally congruent support systems for patients and families. In parallel, future research must prioritize the inclusion of underrepresented populations and sociocultural contexts in epidemiological studies, clinical trials, and implementation science. Advancing culturally responsive, person-centered models of PD care is essential to dismantling structural barriers, reducing disparities, and promoting equitable outcomes for all people living with PD—regardless of geography, ethnicity, or cultural background.

Keywords

Culture belief ethnic diversity stigma health-seeking healthcare-seeking caregiving equity

Introduction

Parkinson's disease (PD) is a complex, progressive neurodegenerative disorder characterized by a heterogeneous constellation of motor and non-motor symptoms that substantially impair the quality of life of people with Parkinson's disease (PwP). While advances in genetics, molecular biology and therapeutics have deepened our understanding of PD pathophysiology, far less attention has been paid to the social and cultural context in which the disease is experienced, recognized and managed. This gap is increasingly consequential as global prevalence rises, particularly in low- and middle-income regions, and as disparities in diagnosis, treatment access, caregiving burden and outcomes become more apparent.¹

Although genetic and environmental risk factors are postulated to be associated with PD, ethnocultural influences are less well studied.² Cultural norms may influence how symptoms are interpreted, whether they are attributed to aging, moral weakness, or supernatural causes, and when, or if, medical care is sought. Cultural norms can also shape illness narratives, stigma, health literacy, and trust in healthcare systems, thereby affecting diagnostic timelines, medication adherence and engagement with specialist services. Across regions, cultural beliefs intersect with systemic barriers such as poverty, geographical isolation, and inequitable health policies, producing marked global and within-country variation in the PD patient journey.

This review examines PD through a cultural lens, integrating evidence on variation in disease expression, as well as diagnostic challenges and treatment access across diverse settings. We discuss cultural influences in stigma, health seeking behaviors and caregiving norms. By highlighting current knowledge gaps and culturally mediated inequities, we argue that culturally informed, contextually responsive models of care are essential for delivering equitable, person-centered PD care worldwide. We further outline practical future steps that could harness and address cultural influences in PD care.

Ethnic and cultural variation in disease expression

The Parkinson's community has long recognized that heterogeneity in the disease extends beyond etiology to multifaceted disease expression. However, studies on ethnic-related phenotypic heterogeneity in PD are lacking, with clinical trials and cohort studies heavily biased towards White populations, specifically those from Europe and the United States. Ben Joseph et al. highlight the difficulties in comparing PD subtypes across ethnic groups in cohort studies due to the small number of studies and differences in study design and data ascertainment.³ Furthermore, the route to and timing of PD diagnosis vary worldwide. Some cultures may view ‘slowing down’ and tremor as a normal part of aging, leading to delayed diagnosis and a decline in quality of life due to reluctance to seek medical attention.⁴ In addition, sex and gender differences in disease expression and healthcare-seeking behaviour may also contribute to PwP delaying medical care.⁵

It is estimated that approximately 5–10% of sporadic PD have a genetic basis, yet genetic variation contributes substantially to regional clinical heterogeneity. Prominent examples of population-specific genetic effects include the LRRK2 p.G2019S variant, in North African Arab Berber populations (∼39%)⁶ and Ashkenazi Jews (∼18%),⁷ compared with ∼1% globally and a rare occurrence in East Asian populations. Additional founder mutations, such as LRRK2 p.R1441G in the Basque population, further illustrate regional genetic clustering.⁸ Variants in GBA1 represent one of the most common genetic risk factors for PD, occurring in 5–15% of cases overall⁹ and up to 10–31% among Ashkenazi Jews.¹⁰ Notably, the mild GBA1 p.Asn409Ser variant accounts for the majority (approximately 70%) of variants among patients of Ashkenazi Jewish ancestry, while the severe p.Leu483Pro variant appears to be more common among the Asian populations.¹¹ Similarly, the PINK1 p.L483P variant linked to autosomal recessive early-onset parkinsonism is enriched in certain West Polynesian populations due to founder mutations.¹² Despite these insights, genetic studies of PD remain heavily skewed toward populations of White European ancestry. Expanding research into diverse populations is essential to refine ancestry-informed genetic screening and to advance understanding of the biological mechanisms underlying sporadic PD.¹³

Societal and economic factors may also determine the clinical profile of incident PD cohorts, as access to treatment and multidisciplinary care varies between and within nations. Disease duration and increased disease complexity may be defined by regional life expectancy and access to treatment. The Global Burden of Disease study indicates that all-cause mortality from PD is rising.¹⁴ Life expectancy in PwP may fracture along racial lines even within nations, as in the USA, where Black PwP have a higher risk of all-cause mortality.¹⁵ Mortality rates are reported to be higher in Black PwP generally,^16,17 and lower in Asian PwP.¹⁶

Diagnosed but untreated PD is uncommon in wealthy countries; however, patients in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) have no access to even basic formulations of levodopa resulting in greater disability.^18–20 Only 3% of PwP in the WHO African Region have consistent access to levodopa.¹⁸ Unpredictable supply chains and affordability issues further compound issues such as stigma and a lack of clinician expertise. This results in a geographic variation in the medication prescription to treat PD, with increased prescription of anticholinergics and dopamine agonists (including more frequent prescription of ergot-derived dopamine agonists) in SSA.^21,22 Impulse control disorders (ICD) are more prevalent in Western versus Asian populations,²³ potentially due to lower doses and/or use of dopamine agonists²⁴ in Asian countries (66% in Europe and the US versus 48.2% in Asia) and genetic factors.²³ Some reports indicate that Asian PwP experience higher rates of dyskinesia, which may influence dosing or combined medication strategies.²⁵ PwP may also access traditional Chinese or Ayurvedic medicine, further influencing the clinical syndrome.

The Parkinsonian non-motor symptoms may also vary across cultures. Societal mores may influence ICD expression; binge eating is more common in US and European studies, compared to hypersexuality in Asian studies.²³ ICDs may be influenced by various cultural factors, including rates of disclosure to doctors, attitudes to mealtimes and economic influences such as access to credit cards for shopping or gambling.²³ It remains to be seen if Western guidelines recommending levodopa as first-line therapy over dopamine agonists will result in a trend toward lower ICDs in these nations as prescribing practices evolve,^26–28 and higher ICD rates in developing countries as access increases and prices fall regionally. Medication complications, particularly in later-stage disease, may thus vary geographically but are often determined by cultural norms and socioeconomic factors.

Regional disparities and challenges in diagnosis and treatment

Substantial regional disparities persist in diagnosis, disease monitoring and treatment of PD around the world.²⁹ These challenges are particularly evident in low- and middle-income regions, including the Middle East, North Africa, and South Asia, where limited access to specialist care, fragmented referral pathways, and reliance on primary care providers or traditional healers often delay diagnosis.³⁰ Cultural beliefs and stigma (see below) surrounding neurological disorders further impede early recognition and engagement with healthcare services.

Cultural health narratives and idioms of distress influence how PD symptoms are perceived, described, and prioritized. In many settings, symptom expressions may not align with biomedical frameworks, contributing to misinterpretation or under recognition by clinicians. Limited health literacy and public awareness can contribute to delayed help-seeking and underreporting of symptoms. For example, in a South-East Asian public survey, common misconceptions include the belief that tremor is a “universal” feature in PD, and that PD is usually familial,³¹ while some regard PD and Alzheimer's disease to be different names for the same disease.³¹ Meanwhile, beliefs regarding the etiology of neurological illness may also affect acceptance of diagnosis and adherence to treatment, resulting in delayed intervention and suboptimal disease monitoring.³²

Disparities are most pronounced in the recognition and management of non-motor symptoms, which are major determinants of disability and quality of life in PD. In resource-limited settings, clinical care often prioritizes motor features, while cognitive, neuropsychiatric, autonomic, and sleep-related symptoms remain underdiagnosed and undertreated.³³ In some settings, cognitive and neuropsychiatric manifestations may be normalized as aging or concealed due to fear of social consequences, while somatization of non-motor features may obscure their neurological origin, complicating diagnosis and treatment.^34,35 Limited clinician and patient awareness,³⁶ the heterogeneous presentation of non-motor symptoms, and restricted access to pharmacological and non-pharmacological therapies exacerbate inequities in care.

System-level constraints, including shortages of trained specialists, medication availability, and geographic barriers to care, further hamper equitable PD management. In India, levodopa and trihexyphenidyl are the most frequently prescribed therapies; the comparatively higher use of trihexyphenidyl likely reflects its wide availability, low cost, and perceived tolerability in a predominantly younger-onset patient population.³⁷ Access to treatment is not only determined by location but is also influenced by race and ethnicity within countries. Minority groups often face multiple challenges in accessing healthcare, including insurance coverage, clinician bias, reduced trust in healthcare systems and delayed diagnosis. Black PwP are recognized to be less likely to receive device-assisted therapies, including deep-brain stimulation.³⁸ Addressing these challenges requires culturally sensitive diagnostic approaches, improved education for healthcare providers and patients, and expanded access to multidisciplinary care.^39–41

How PD is diagnosed is also shifting from a purely clinical diagnosis to a biological definition of disease.⁴² Biomarkers such as alpha-synuclein seed amplification assay are increasingly available at a research level but are also being offered in some jurisdictions at a financial cost to patients. While increased availability of such technology would surely contribute to increasing access of underrepresented populations to clinical trials and research, its dissemination without regulation or standardization in less well-resourced healthcare systems poses challenges of false positives, inaccurate diagnoses and the potential for morbidity of unwarranted treatments. The new era of PD diagnostics will not be equitable across regions. Real-world experience with these technologies will be necessary to determine the extent to which culture informs decision-making in the diagnosis and counselling of risk in prodromal PD, as has been seen in other neurodegenerative disorders such as Huntington's disease⁴³ and Alzheimer's disease.⁴⁴

Cross cultural differences in stigma

Stigma, a complex social phenomenon, refers to the labeling of an individual as inferior or “tainted” on account of an attribute or diagnosis that society deems undesirable. In PD, stigma often arises from visible motor symptoms (e.g., tremors, slow movements, and dyskinesia) and progressive disability as the disease advances, leading to lower quality of life.⁴⁵ A recent review of qualitative studies on stigma in PwP identified three primary stigma themes: (1) self-stigma, characterized by feelings of vulnerability, shame and efforts to conceal symptoms, (2) public stigma, marked by societal exclusion, misconceptions, and stereotyping, particularly regarding visible symptoms and age, and (3) structural stigma, involving discrimination in workplaces and inadequate institutional support.⁴⁶ Beyond the patient, stigma can also affect families as caregivers may experience affiliated or courtesy stigma (“stigma by association”), i.e., feeling judged or socially avoided due to their loved one's condition. Figure 1 presents verbatim excerpts depicting stigma and shared struggles experienced by PwP and their caregivers across diverse geographical and cultural contexts.^{33,39,47–59}

Figure 1.

Selected verbatim excerpts depicting experiences of stigma and shared struggles related to PD, curated from published studies conducted in diverse geographical and cultural settings.

Cultural beliefs and misconceptions play important roles in shaping the stigma of PD, and as the former are innate to given populations, they would vary worldwide. A recurring theme across multiple cultures is the misattribution to aging, moral weakness, or supernatural punishment.⁶⁰ Surveys in parts of Asia found that many people believe PD is caused by something the patient did in the past implying a form of punishment for prior behavior.^31,36,61 Studies from Africa and the Middle East report that features of parkinsonism and a diagnosis of PD are frequently attributed to witchcraft, curses, or a divine test/punishment.^56,62–64 These cultural narratives are deeply embedded, that even educated families may consult faith healers or local herbalists before a physician or neurologist.⁶³ These beliefs negatively impact PwP, causing social exclusion and contributing to poor health-seeking behavior and poor adherence to orthodox treatment. In such environments, individuals often hesitate to disclose their condition beyond close family, fearing gossip (accusations of immorality) or ostracism (fear of contagion). Likewise, families might also keep the diagnosis secret to avoid negative labels and protect the family's reputation (e.g., worrying it could affect marriage prospects), which further limits social support.

Besides cultural beliefs, demographic and sociocultural factors including gender, marital status, education and socioeconomic levels can influence the perception and impact of stigma experienced by PwP. In some studies from Asia, female PwP reported higher stigma than their male counterparts, whereas studies from Western countries often find little difference by sex or gender—perhaps due to different social (societal) expectations.^60,65 In China, patients with stronger adherence to Asian values were more likely to exhibit a stronger negative impact of self-stigma on their help-seeking intentions. Meanwhile, rural living was associated with increased stigma in Eastern Europe. Within the same society, the additional social determinants of health, such as race, ethnicity and sexual orientation or identification, may further compound the negative impact of felt stigma (i.e., double stigma).⁴⁵ Notably, motor or non-motor symptoms of PD are perceived differently, and their stigmatization impact may differ across societies. For example, motor fluctuations were associated with high degree of stigma in European countries,⁶⁶ while bowel and bladder issues were significantly associated with caregiver affiliate stigma in the United States of America.⁶⁷ Likewise, factors like cognitive decline or hallucinations carry more stigma in certain cultures than in others.⁶⁰ On the other hand, some influences appear universal: visible disability and advanced disease severity tend to heighten stigma everywhere.

Despite its significance, stigma in PD remains under-researched, especially in non-Western and low-resource settings. Most studies to date come from Europe or North America and have focused on clinical predictors of stigma (e.g., symptom severity, disease duration, and treatment outcomes) rather than sociocultural factors. While managing motor symptoms can alleviate some stigma, a purely biomedical focus overlooks the fundamentally social nature of this problem. A broader approach is needed—one that integrates social, cultural, and psychological perspectives into research and care.

Cultural variations in healthcare-seeking behaviors

Across global contexts, healthcare-seeking behaviors among PwP are profoundly shaped by culture, health literacy, geography, and trust in medical institutions (Figure 2). Although the relative contribution of these barriers varies by region, they consistently reflect broader differences in social norms, health literacy, and access to neurological expertise.^68,69

Figure 2.

Factors affecting healthcare-seeking behaviors, caregiving, and social support among PwP. The figure illustrates a spectrum of potential influences, ranging from factors on the left, such as stigma which primarily hinder healthcare-seeking behaviors, to those on the right, where family value systems and governmental welfare support shape caregiving and social support. Central to the figure are overlapping factors impacting both domains, including health literacy, geographical and structural barriers, cultural beliefs, and societal expectations.

Evidence from Asia illustrates the scale of these challenges. Community-based studies in China indicate that only ∼30% of PwP receive a formal diagnosis prior to self-screening, highlighting low disease awareness and restricted access to neurologists, particularly in rural areas.⁷⁰ Across Southeast Asia, a persistent knowledge gap among both the public and healthcare professionals remains a major barrier to timely diagnosis and effective management.⁷¹ In Thailand, insufficient PD knowledge among general practitioners contributes to diagnostic delays and fragmented referral pathways,⁷² although targeted educational interventions have improved diagnostic accuracy and clinical competence.⁷³ In Malaysia, public perception studies show that PD is often equated solely with tremor and mistakenly believed to be curable, with limited recognition of non-motor symptoms such as depression, sleep disturbance, and constipation, despite their major contribution to disease burden.³¹ Similarly, in Saudi Arabia, education level strongly predicts PD awareness and health-seeking behavior, with significantly greater knowledge observed among individuals with at least a high-school education.⁷⁴

Among Hispanic and immigrant populations in Europe and the Americas, language barriers, cultural discordance, and reduced health system literacy exacerbate underdiagnosis and limit adherence to pharmacological treatment.^69,75 Individual-level challenges—including limited capacity to navigate complex healthcare systems, reduced confidence engaging with clinicians, and financial burden—interact with systemic constraints such as workforce shortages and uneven distribution of specialist services.⁷⁶ These patterns demonstrate that even in high-income countries with advanced healthcare infrastructure, minority populations may experience care inequities comparable to those in low-resource settings.

Trust in healthcare institutions is a critical determinant of engagement with PD services. In indigenous and geographically isolated communities, historical experiences of colonization, cultural unsafety, and systemic neglect have fostered enduring mistrust of biomedical systems. In rural Australia, long travel distances, limited specialist availability, and restricted access to allied health services, contribute to delayed presentation and fragmented continuity of care.^77,78 Comparable inequities are evident in New Zealand, where Māori populations exhibit the lowest recorded prevalence of PD.⁷⁹ While higher smoking rates and hyperuricemia may confer some biological protection,⁸⁰ this discrepancy is more plausibly explained by under-recognition and methodological limitations, including reliance on prescription-based prevalence estimates that exclude untreated individuals. This interpretation is supported by Māori patients’ reports of substantial barriers to accessing culturally safe neurological care.^79,81

Geographic inequities in treatment availability further compound diagnostic and therapeutic gaps. In Thailand, although levodopa is universally available, other dopaminergic agents are accessible in fewer than one-quarter of hospitals, reflecting persistent disparities in therapeutic options.^71,82 Such findings underscore how geographic isolation, health system fragmentation, and structural racism interact to reinforce inequities across the PD care continuum.

Cultural explanatory models of PD also delay engagement with biomedical care. In several African settings, chronic neurological disorders are commonly attributed to supernatural or spiritual causes, including curses or divine punishment.^63,64 These beliefs often lead PwP and their families to prioritize prayer, ritual practices, traditional healers or orthodox treatment over medical evaluation. In many Middle Eastern and African contexts, faith healers serve as the first point of contact for neurological symptoms, contributing to prolonged delays before biomedical intervention.⁸³ These interpretations carry substantial social costs, including stigma, social exclusion, and accusations of immorality or contagion.

Preferences for complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) or integrative health approaches represent another culturally mediated influence on PD management. Approximately 40% of Western PwP report CAM use, compared with substantially higher rates in Asia, including 61% in Singapore⁸⁴ and 76% in Korea.⁸⁵ In East Asia, CAM practices such as acupuncture, moxibustion, herbal medicine, and massage are widely used, often grounded in beliefs regarding energy balance and anti-inflammatory effects. Common supplements include coenzyme Q10, ginseng, and herbal formulations (e.g., Banisteriopsis caapi extract and Qingxinhuatan tang).⁸⁶ Although some modalities may provide transient symptom relief, randomized controlled trials have not demonstrated sustained clinical benefit, and CAM is frequently used as a substitute rather than an adjunct to dopaminergic therapy.^86,87 In sub-Saharan Africa, where levodopa access is limited, Mucuna pruriens is commonly used as a pragmatic alternative,^88,89 despite concerns regarding dosage variability and safety.⁹⁰

Notably, inequities persist in access to advanced therapies. Gender norms may intensify disparities, women constitute only approximately one-third of deep brain stimulation (DBS) recipients worldwide.⁹¹ Racial minorities experience even greater disparities: Black PwP in the United States are 5–8 times less likely to undergo DBS, and Asian PwP also demonstrate significantly reduced access compared with White PwP.^92–94 Other device-aided therapies, such as levodopa–carbidopa intestinal gel, remain unavailable in most Asian countries due to reimbursement limitations and lack of multidisciplinary infrastructure.^95,96

Conversely, growing interest in genetic testing highlights both opportunity and inequity. In the Dominican Republic, 95% of PwP expressed willingness to undergo genetic testing, and 98% desired post-test counselling.⁹⁷ However, access remains constrained by limited specialist availability, geographic barriers, cost, and perceptions of limited clinical utility, particularly in regions where testing is not reimbursed.^59,61,98 Fear of stigma, guilt, or psychological distress following pathogenic results further deters uptake.⁵⁹

Cultural norms in caregiving and social support

Caregiving is a central component of PD management as progressive motor and non-motor symptoms lead to declining functional independence and increasing reliance on informal care. As disease severity advances, caregivers provide essential support across multiple domains, including medication administration, mobility assistance, and activities of daily living.^99,100 Although patients may demonstrate psychological resilience, adaptation to advanced motor disability or cognitive impairment may be limited, rendering sustained caregiving indispensable. Caregiving in PD is therefore not solely a clinical extension of treatment, but a socially embedded practice shaped by cultural norms, family structures, and socio-economic conditions that vary across regions (Figure 2). Interestingly, one study revealed that non-White patients with Parkinson′s and related disorders were more likely to consider hospitalized care vs. home care during the end-of-life period compared to White patients.¹⁰¹

At a societal level, caregiving arrangements are influenced by dominant cultural orientations, particularly collectivism and individualism, as well as by national policies and prevailing expectations regarding familial responsibility for care. In many collectivist societies across East and South Asia, the Middle East, Latin America, and sub-Saharan Africa, caregiving is commonly conceptualized as a moral or familial obligation rooted in interdependence, reciprocal responsibility, and kinship ties.¹⁰² Filial piety—the expectation that adult children respect and care for ageing parents—remains a salient organizing principle in several Asian cultures and African settings.¹⁰³ However, empirical studies suggest that the implications of filial obligation for caregiver burden are not uniform and may be moderated by structural factors, such as co-residency. In China, where filial duty often entails living with an ill parent, caregiving demands may be intensified, whereas in many Western countries, adult children more commonly live separately, potentially contributing to lower reported burden among non-co-resident adult-child caregivers compared with spousal caregivers.¹⁰⁴ In Latin American settings, caregiving is frequently framed as an expected and valued family role rather than a discretionary activity, reflecting the cultural construct of familism, which emphasizes loyalty, reciprocity, and solidarity within nuclear and extended families. While familism does not eliminate caregiving-related stress, it appears to be associated with lower perceived burden and improved mental health-related quality of life in some PD caregiver populations, including Mexican families, particularly where family cohesion is strong.¹⁰⁵

Across regions, caregiving is also consistently gendered. Women are more likely than men to assume responsibility for intimate personal care tasks, as well as for instrumental activities including meal preparation and household management.¹⁰⁶ In many Asian contexts, caregiving for individuals with PD is predominantly undertaken by women—most commonly wives, daughters, or daughters-in-law—reflecting entrenched norms of domestic responsibility and filial duty, as observed in South Korea.¹⁰⁷ Although data from African settings remain limited, available evidence suggests similar family-centered caregiving models shaped by communal values, with primary caregiving most often provided by female relatives. In Hispanic and Latin American communities, caregiving roles similarly reflect familism and traditional gender divisions, with women providing hands-on daily care and men more often occupying roles centered on financial provision and decision-making.¹⁰⁸

Future directions

Delayed and suboptimal Parkinson's care arises from a complex interplay of resource limitations with cultural, socioeconomic, and systemic factors. Addressing these multi-layered barriers requires culturally grounded solutions: community-based education campaigns in local languages, strategic collaboration with faith and traditional healers as referral partners, mobile and tele-neurology services for remote regions, and proactive policies ensuring equitable access to pharmacologic, surgical, and genetic innovations. Practically, healthcare providers and policymakers should complement medical therapy with community education, culturally sensitive support, and anti-stigma campaigns. In the broader context of PD care, confronting stigma aligns with the movement to address social determinants of health and provide more holistic support to patients and families. Ultimately, reducing stigma will encourage PwP to seek help, improve adherence to treatment, and enhance quality of life across all cultural contexts. Only by integrating cultural sensitivity with structural reform can healthcare systems reduce diagnostic delays and deliver person-centered Parkinson's care worldwide.

Beyond sociocultural and structural factors, advancing equitable PD care requires a deeper understanding of PD genetic architecture across diverse and historically underrepresented populations. Most genetic discoveries have focused on individuals of European ancestry, limiting the generalizability of risk loci, penetrance estimates, and genotype–phenotype correlations. This underrepresentation risks widening disparities, as population-specific variants and modifiers may remain undetected, leading to delayed diagnoses and suboptimal counseling. Expanding research in regions such as Africa, the Middle East, Latin America, and Oceania is essential to uncover novel risk genes and to better interpret known variants like LRRK2, GBA1, and PINK1 in their local contexts. Integrating population-specific genomics with epidemiological and sociocultural data can improve diagnosis, prognostication, and access to emerging therapies.

Building on these insights, future research should prioritize integrative, globally inclusive frameworks that align genetic, sociocultural, and health-systems perspectives in PD. Large, longitudinal cohorts from underrepresented regions are needed to capture population-specific disease trajectories, gene–environment interactions, and culturally mediated phenotypes that remain invisible in current datasets. Research agendas should also shift toward developing and validating culturally adapted diagnostic tools, outcome measures, and stigma-assessment instruments that reflect local beliefs, languages, and care pathways. Equally important is implementation science to evaluate context-specific models of care—such as community-embedded screening, task-shifting, and tele-neurology—and to identify scalable strategies that translate scientific advances into equitable access to diagnosis, counseling, and emerging therapies. Embedding cultural diversity as a core principle of Parkinson's research will be essential to advancing precision medicine while reducing global disparities in care and outcomes.

Conclusion

Ethnocultural differences and social factors have important influences on disease expression, healthcare-seeking behavior and caregiving norms with important healthcare and societal implications in PD. As the global burden of PD continues to rise, efforts to shape its future must be as diverse and interconnected as the world it affects. Recognizing and responding to cultural diversity in PD is not only a matter of equity—it is a scientific and ethical imperative for delivering truly person-centered care on a global scale.

Footnotes

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Declaration of conflicting interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iDs

Hugo Morales-Briceno

Kai-Hsiang Stanley Chen

Paloma Becker

Laura Williams

Vijayashankar Paramanandam

Tzi Shin Toh

Oluwadamilola Ojo

Samia Ben Sassi

Zakiyah Aldaajani

Ai Huey Tan

References

Cui

, et al. Projections for prevalence of Parkinson’s disease and its driving factors in 195 countries and territories to 2050: modelling study of global burden of disease study 2021. Br Med J 2025: 388.

Dorsey

De Miranda

Hussain

, et al. Environmental toxicants and Parkinson's disease: recent evidence, risks, and prevention opportunities. Lancet Neurol 2025; 24: 976–986.

Ben-Joseph

Marshall

Lees

, et al. Ethnic variation in the manifestation of Parkinson’s disease: a narrative review. J Park Dis 2020; 10: 31–45.

Pan

Stutzbach

Reichwein

, et al. Knowledge and attitudes about Parkinson’s disease among a diverse group of older adults. J Cross Cult Gerontol 2014; 29: 339–352.

Subramaniam

Mathur

Oosterbaan

, et al. Unmet needs of women living with Parkinson's disease: Gaps and Controversies. Mov Disord 2022; 33: 444455

Lesage

Dürr

Tazir

, et al. LRRK2 G2019s as a cause of Parkinson's disease in north African arabs. N Engl J Med 2006; 354: 422–423.

Ozelius

Senthil

Saunders-Pullman

, et al. LRRK2 G2019s as a cause of Parkinson's disease in ashkenazi Jews. N Engl J Med 2006; 354: 424–425.

Simón-Sánchez

Martí-Massó

Sánchez-Mut

, et al. Parkinson's disease due to the R1441G mutation in dardarin: a founder effect in the basques. Mov Disord 2006; 21: 1954–1959.

Sidransky

Nalls

Aasly

, et al. Multicenter analysis of glucocerebrosidase mutations in Parkinson's disease. N Engl J Med 2009; 361: 1651–1661.

10.

Neumann

Bras

Deas

, et al. Glucocerebrosidase mutations in clinical and pathologically proven Parkinson's disease. Brain 2009; 132: 1783–1794.

11.

Lim

S-Y

Tan

Ahmad-Annuar

, et al. Uncovering the genetic basis of Parkinson's disease globally: from discoveries to the clinic. Lancet Neurol 2024; 23: 1267–1280.

12.

Tan

Lohmann

Tay

, et al. PINK1 P. Leu347Pro mutations in malays: prevalence and illustrative cases. Parkinsonism Relat Disord 2020; 79: 34–39.

13.

Kim

Vitale

Otani

, et al. Multi-ancestry genome-wide association meta-analysis of Parkinson’s disease. Nat Genet 2024; 56: 27–36.

14.

Lampropoulos

Malli

Sinani

, et al. Worldwide trends in mortality related to Parkinson's disease in the period of 1994–2019: analysis of vital registration data from the WHO mortality database. Front Neurol 2022; 13: 956440.

15.

Snyder

Upton

Hassett

, et al. Black representation in the primary care physician workforce and its association with population life expectancy and mortality rates in the US. JAMA Netw Open 2023; 6: e236687–e236687.

16.

Willis

Schootman

Kung

, et al. Predictors of survival in patients with Parkinson disease. Arch Neurol 2012; 69: 601–607.

17.

Fernandes

Socal

Schuh

AFS

, et al. Clinical and epidemiological factors associated with mortality in Parkinson’s disease in a Brazilian cohort. Park Dis 2015; 2015: 959304.

18.

Subramanian

Okubadejo

Fothergill-Misbah

. Levodopa-an oldie but a goodie-time to make it accessible to all in sub-saharan africa. Mov Disord 2025; 40(6): 1034–1036.

19.

Fothergill-Misbah

Hooker

Kwasa

, et al. Access to medicines for Parkinson's disease in Kenya: a qualitative exploration. Mov Disord Clin Pract 2024; 11: 1373–1378.

20.

Cilia

Akpalu

Sarfo

, et al. The modern pre-levodopa era of Parkinson’s disease: insights into motor complications from sub-saharan Africa. Brain 2014; 137: 2731–2742.

21.

Hamid

Ayele

Massi

, et al. Availability of therapies and services for Parkinson's disease in Africa: a continent-wide survey. Mov Disord 2021; 36: 2393–2407.

22.

Okubadejo

Ojo

Wahab

, et al. A nationwide survey of Parkinson's disease medicines availability and affordability in Nigeria. Mov Disord Clin Pract 2019; 6: 27–33.

23.

Parra-Díaz

Chico-García

Beltrán-Corbellini

, et al. Does the country make a difference in impulse control disorders? A systematic review. Mov Disord Clin Pract 2021; 8: 25–32.

24.

Lim

S-Y

Tan

Ngam

, et al. Impulsive–compulsive behaviors are common in Asian Parkinson’s disease patients: assessment using the QUIP. Parkinsonism Relat Disord 2011; 17: 761–764.

25.

Woitalla

Mueller

Russ

, et al. The management approaches to dyskinesia vary from country to country. Neuroepidemiology 2008; 29: 163–169.

26.

Pringsheim

Day

Smith

, et al. Dopaminergic therapy for motor symptoms in early Parkinson disease practice guideline summary: a report of the AAN guideline subcommittee. Neurology 2021; 97: 942–957.

27.

Rogers

Davies

Pink

, et al. Parkinson’s disease: summary of updated NICE guidance. Br Med J 2017: 358.

28.

Bucsa

Bruhs

Apan

, et al. Drug utilization study of antiparkinsonian medication in Romania during 25 years. Front Pharmacol 2025; 16: 1534344.

29.

Dorsey

Bloem

. The Parkinson pandemic—a call to action. JAMA Neurol 2018; 75: 9–10.

30.

Khalil

Chahine

Siddiqui

, et al. Parkinson's disease in the MENASA countries. Lancet Neurol 2020; 19: 293–294.

31.

Tan

Marras

, et al. Knowledge of Parkinson’s disease in a multiethnic urban Asian setting. J Park Dis 2015; 5: 865–879.

32.

Mendenhall

De Silva

Hanlon

, et al. Acceptability and feasibility of using non-specialist health workers to deliver mental health care: stakeholder perceptions from the PRIME district sites in Ethiopia, India, Nepal, South Africa, and Uganda. Soc Sci Med 2014; 118: 33–42.

33.

Fothergill-Misbah

. The lived experience of stigma and Parkinson’s disease in Kenya: a public health challenge. BMC Public Health 2023; 23: 64.

34.

Aldaajani

Khalil

. Challenges in managing nonmotor symptoms of Parkinson's disease in low-resourced settings with unavailability of newer drugs. Mov Disord Clin Pract 2024; 11: 23.

35.

Carrozzino

Bech

Patierno

, et al. Somatization in Parkinson's disease: a systematic review. Prog Neuropsychopharmacol Biol Psychiatry 2017; 78: 18–26.

36.

Choo

Lim

S-Y

Chinna

, et al. Understanding patients’ and caregivers’ perspectives and educational needs in Parkinson’s disease: a multi-ethnic Asian study. Neurol Sci 2020; 41: 2831–2842.

37.

Surathi

Kamble

Bhalsing

, et al. Prescribing pattern for Parkinson’s disease in Indian community before referral to tertiary center. Can J Neurol Sci 2017; 44: 705–710.

38.

Cramer

Palzer

, et al. Persistent racial disparities in deep brain stimulation for Parkinson's disease. Ann Neurol 2022; 92: 246–254.

39.

Crooks

Mitchell

Wynne

, et al. Exploring the stigma experienced by people affected by Parkinson’s disease: a systematic review. BMC Public Health 2025; 25: 25.

40.

Phokaewvarangkul

Vorachit

Phoumindr

, et al. Addressing knowledge gaps in Parkinson’s disease: a report on the movement disorder society’s centre-to-centre initiative to improve Parkinson’s disease services in Lao people’s democratic republic. BMC Med Educ 2020; 20: 39.

41.

Willis

Schootman

Evanoff

, et al. Neurologist care in Parkinson disease: a utilization, outcomes, and survival study. Neurology 2011; 77: 851–857.

42.

Cardoso

Goetz

Mestre

, et al. A statement of the MDS on biological definition, staging, and classification of Parkinson's disease. Mov Disord 2024; 39: 259–266.

43.

Baig

Strong

Rosser

, et al. 22 Years of predictive testing for huntington’s disease: the experience of the UK huntington’s prediction consortium. Eur J Hum Genet 2016; 24: 1396–1402.

44.

Erickson

Clark

Ketchum

, et al. Implications of preclinical Alzheimer's disease biomarker disclosure for US policy and society. Alzheimer's & Dementia: Diagnosis, Assessment & Disease Monitoring 2022; 14: e12339.

45.

McDaniels

Pontone

Mathur

, et al. Staying hidden: the burden of stigma in PD. Parkinsonism Relat Disord 2023; 116: 105838.

46.

Soilemezi

Siquier

Andrés

. Exploring stigma in people living with Parkinson's disease and their caregivers: a review of qualitative studies. J Park Dis 2025; 15(3): 480–494.

47.

Chiong-Rivero

Ryan

Flippen

, et al. Patients’ and caregivers’ experiences of the impact of Parkinson’s disease on health status. Patient Relat Outcome Meas 2011: 57–70.

48.

Goering

Wexler

Klein

. Trading vulnerabilities: living with Parkinson’s disease before and after deep brain stimulation. Camb Q Healthc Ethics 2021; 30: 623–630.

49.

Hermanns

. The invisible and visible stigmatization of Parkinson's disease. J Am Assoc Nurse Pract 2013; 25: 563–566.

50.

Valcarenghi

Alvarez

Santos

SSC

, et al. The daily lives of people with Parkinson's disease. Rev Bras Enferm 2018; 71: 272–279.

51.

Shah

Read

Davies

, et al. People with Parkinson’s perspectives and experiences of self-management: qualitative findings from a UK study. PLoS One 2022; 17: e0273428.

52.

Fernandes

Domingos

Fernandes

, et al. Barriers and strategies affecting the use of assistive devices for falls prevention among people with Parkinson’s disease: a qualitative pilot study. BMC Geriatr 2025; 25: 52.

53.

Caap-Ahlgren

Ove Dehlin

. Older Swedish women's experiences of living with symptoms related to Parkinson's disease. J Adv Nurs 2002; 39: 87–95.

54.

Thangavel

Memedi

Hedström

. Information and communication technology for managing social isolation and loneliness among people living with Parkinson disease: qualitative study of barriers and facilitators. J Med Internet Res 2024; 26: e48175.

55.

AboJabel

Argavan

Hassin-Baer

, et al. Exploring the perceptions and stigmatizing experiences of Israeli family caregivers of people with Parkinson's disease. J Aging Stud 2021; 56: 100910.

56.

Nazzal

Khalil

. Living with Parkinson’s disease: a Jordanian perspective. Scand J Occup Ther 2017; 24: 74–82.

57.

Lee

Yoo

Ahn

, et al. Issues on health care for people with Parkinson's disease in Korea: a focus group study. Top Geriatr Rehabil 2018; 34: 131–137.

58.

Ong

Zakaria

Lee

, et al. The relationship between self-stigma, basic and instrumental activities of daily living, and communication participation among individuals with Parkinson’s disease. SAGE Open 2024; 14: 21582440241295444.

59.

Gerard

Tan

Lim

, et al. Genetic testing for Parkinson's disease in an underrepresented population: knowledge, attitudes, and ethical considerations from a Malaysian perspective. J Genet Couns 2025; 34: e70069.

60.

Karacan

Kibrit

Yekedüz

, et al. Cross-cultural differences in stigma associated with Parkinson’s disease: a systematic review. J Park Dis 2023; 13: 699–715.

61.

Tan

Cornejo-Olivas

Okubadejo

, et al. Genetic testing for Parkinson's disease and movement disorders in less privileged areas: barriers and opportunities. Mov Disord Clin Pract 2024; 11: 14–20.

62.

Mshana

Dotchin

Walker

. We call it the shaking illness’: perceptions and experiences of Parkinson's disease in rural northern Tanzania. BMC Public Health 2011; 11: 219.

63.

Fothergill-Misbah

Walker

Kwasa

, et al. Old people problems”, uncertainty and legitimacy: challenges with diagnosing Parkinson's disease in Kenya. Soc Sci Med 2021; 282: 114148.

64.

Mokaya

Gray

Carr

. Beliefs, knowledge and attitudes towards Parkinson's disease among a Xhosa speaking black population in South Africa: a cross-sectional study. Parkinsonism Relat Disord 2017; 41: 51–57.

65.

Meng

Jin

Gao

, et al. The quality of life in patients with Parkinson's disease: focus on gender difference. Brain Behav 2022; 12: e2517.

66.

Hechtner

Vogt

Zöllner

, et al. Quality of life in Parkinson's disease patients with motor fluctuations and dyskinesias in five European countries. Parkinsonism Relat Disord 2014; 20: 969–974.

67.

Henry

Perrin

Lageman

, et al. Parkinson’s symptoms and caregiver affiliate stigma: a multinational study. Curr Alzheimer Res 2021; 18: 222–231.

68.

Koehn

Drummond

Jasper

, et al. Mechanisms of inequitable access to Parkinson’s disease care: a critical interpretive synthesis. Int J Equity Health 2025; 24: 250.

69.

Ramadhan

Stott

Schrag

. The barriers to receiving health care for people with Parkinson’s from predominantly Asian backgrounds in the UK. npj Park Dis 2025; 11: 131.

70.

Zhang

Wang

, et al. Awareness, treatment, and rehabilitation of elderly with Parkinson’s disease—China, 2015–2017. China CDC weekly 2020; 2: 241.

71.

Bhidayasiri

Virameteekul

Sukoandari

, et al. Challenges of Parkinson’s disease care in Southeast Asia. In: Neuropsychopharmacotherapy. Berlin: Springer, 2021, pp.1–21.

72.

Bhidayasiri

Brenden

Viwattanakulvanid

, et al. Identifying gaps in knowledge about Parkinson disease among medical professionals in Thailand. Neurology 2014; 82: 2238–2240.

73.

Viwattanakulvanid

Somrongthong

Vankwani

, et al. Predictors and level of knowledge regarding Parkinson's disease among patients: a cross-sectional study from Thailand. Int J Prev Med 2020; 11: 25.

74.

Alshammari

Al-Banaqi

Almutairi

, et al. Knowledge, attitudes, and practices about Parkinson’s disease among the general population of the eastern province of Saudi Arabia. Healthcare 2025; 13(7): 795.

75.

Ghilardi

Di Rocco

Fearday

, et al. A model to address healthcare gaps and poor research participation in hispanic patients with Parkinson's disease. Front Aging Neurosci 2025; 17: 1610448.

76.

Zaman

Ghahari

McColl

. Barriers to accessing healthcare services for people with Parkinson’s disease: a scoping review. J Park Dis 2021; 11: 1537–1553.

77.

Fealy

Logan

Micalos

, et al. Exploring Parkinson's disease prevalence in regional, rural and remote Australia: a systematic scoping review. Aust J Rural Health 2023; 31: 1156–1167.

78.

Iansek

Danoudis

Ceely

. A rural health model for Parkinson's care: the Clients’ perspective. J Patient Exp 2025; 12: 23743735251346590.

79.

Pitcher

Myall

Pearson

, et al. Parkinson's disease across ethnicities: a nationwide study in New Zealand. Mov Disord 2018; 33: 1440–1448.

80.

Dalbeth

House

Horne

, et al. The experience and impact of gout in māori and pacific people: a prospective observational study. Clin Rheumatol 2013; 32: 247–251.

81.

Alamri

Pitcher

Anderson

. Variations in the patterns of prevalence and therapy in australasian Parkinson’s disease patients of different ethnicities. BMJ Neurol Open 2020; 2: e000033.

82.

Sakdisornchai

Sringean

Jitkritsadakul

, et al. The availability of anti-parkinsonian drugs in Thailand and associated factors. Parkinsonism Relat Disord 2018; 46: 21.

83.

Burns

Tomita

. Traditional and religious healers in the pathway to care for people with mental disorders in Africa: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol 2015; 50: 867–877.

84.

Tan

Lau

Jamora

RDG

, et al. Use of complementary therapies in patients with Parkinson's disease in Singapore. Mov Disord 2006; 21: 86–89.

85.

Kim

Lee

Kim

, et al. Use of complementary and alternative medicine by Korean patients with Parkinson's disease. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 2009; 111: 156–160.

86.

Bega

Gonzalez-Latapi

Zadikoff

, et al. A review of the clinical evidence for complementary and alternative therapies in Parkinson’s disease. Curr Treat Options Neurol 2014; 16: 14.

87.

Angelopoulou

Anagnostouli

Chrousos

, et al. Massage therapy as a complementary treatment for Parkinson’s disease: a systematic literature review. Complement Ther Med 2020; 49: 102340.

88.

Fothergill-Misbah

Maroo

Cham

, et al.

Could Mucuna pruriens be the answer to Parkinson's disease management in sub-Saharan Africa and other low-income countries worldwide?

Parkinsonism Relat Disord 2020; 73: –7.

89.

Caronni

Del Sorbo

Barichella

, et al. Mucuna pruriens to treat Parkinson's disease in low-income countries: recommendations and practical guidelines from the farmer to clinical trials. Paving the way for future use in clinical practice. Parkinsonism Relat Disord 2024; 124: 106983.

90.

Katzenschlager

Evans

Manson

, et al. Mucuna pruriens in Parkinson’s disease: a double blind clinical and pharmacological study. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2004; 75: 1672–1677.

91.

Poonja

Torabi

, et al. Ethnic and gender disparities in access to deep brain stimulation surgery for parkinson's disease. Mov Disord Clin Pract 2026; 13(2): 430–441.

92.

Chan

McGovern

Brown

, et al. Disparities in access to deep brain stimulation surgery for Parkinson disease: interaction between African American race and medicaid use. JAMA Neurol 2014; 71: 291–299.

93.

Bishay

Hughes

Zargari

, et al. Disparities in access to deep brain stimulation for Parkinson’s disease and proposed interventions: a literature review. Stereotact Funct Neurosurg 2024; 102: 179–194.

94.

Willis

Schootman

Kung

, et al. Disparities in deep brain stimulation surgery among insured elders with Parkinson disease. Neurology 2014; 82: 163–171.

95.

Prado

Jamora

. Cost of Parkinson’s disease among Filipino patients seen at a public tertiary hospital in metro Manila. J Clin Neurosci 2020; 74: 41–46.

96.

Bhidayasiri

Hattori

Jeon

, et al. Asian perspectives on the recognition and management of levodopa ‘wearing-off’in Parkinson’s disease. Expert Rev Neurother 2015; 15: 1285–1297.

97.

Hackl

Cook

Wetherill

, et al. Readiness for Parkinson’s disease genetic testing and counseling in patients and their relatives in urban settings in the Dominican Republic. npj Park Dis 2023; 9: 26.

98.

Saunders-Pullman

Raymond

Ortega

, et al. International genetic testing and counseling practices for Parkinson's disease. Mov Disord 2023; 38: 1527–1535.

99.

Rosqvist

Schrag

Odin

, et al. Caregiver burden and quality of life in late stage Parkinson’s disease. Brain Sci 2022; 12: 11.

100.

Longacre

Roche

Kueppers

, et al. Parkinson’s disease and caregiving roles, demands, and support needs and experiences: a scoping review. Healthcare 2025; 13(1): 79.

101.

Aamodt

Eickholt

Coughlin

G, et al.

Sex and racial/ethnic differences in end of life care preferences in persons with Parkinson's disease and related disorders

Mov Disord 2025; 40: 1951–1964.

102.

Revenson

Griva

Luszczynska

, et al. What is caregiving and how should we study it? In: Caregiving in the illness context. Springer, 2016, pp.1–14.

103.

Zarzycki

Morrison

Bei

, et al. Cultural and societal motivations for being informal caregivers: a qualitative systematic review and meta-synthesis. Health Psychol Rev 2023; 17: 247–276.

104.

Xiao

Patrician

Montgomery

, et al. Filial piety and older adult caregiving among Chinese and Chinese-American families in the United States: a concept analysis. BMC Nurs 2024; 23: 15.

105.

Trapp

Ertl

Gonzalez-Arredondo

, et al. Family cohesion, burden, and health-related quality of life among Parkinson’s disease caregivers in Mexico. Int Psychogeriatr 2019; 31: 1039–1045.

106.

Navaie-Waliser

Feldman

Gould

, et al. When the caregiver needs care: the plight of vulnerable caregivers. Am J Public Health 2002; 92: 409–413.

107.

Baik

Kim

J-S

Koh

S-B

, et al. Patients and their caregivers’ burdens for Parkinson’s disease in Korea. J Mov Disord 2017; 10: 109.

108.

Sehar

Rawat

Choudhury

, et al. Comprehensive understanding of hispanic caregivers: focus on innovative methods and validations. J Alzheimers Dis Rep 2023; 7: 557–574.-