The impact of drug-induced dyskinesias on rapid alternating movements in patients with Parkinson's disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We investigated the likelihood that hypokinesia/bradykinesia coexist with druginduced \ndyskinesias (DID) in patients with Parkinson's disease (PD). The influence of \ndyskinesias on rapid alternating movements (RAM) was investigated in ten dyskinetic \npatients (DPD). Their motor performance was compared to that of ten age/gendermatched \nnon-dyskinetic patients (NDPD) and ten healthy control subjects. Whole-body \nmagnitude (WBM) and fast pronation-supination at the wrist were recorded using 6- \ndegrees of freedom magnetic motion tracker and forearm rotational sensors, respectively. \nSubjects were asked to pronate-supinate their dominant hand for 10s. Pre- and postmeasures \nwere taken in a neutral position for 20s. RANGE (measure of hypokinesia), \nDURATION (measure of bradykinesia). VELOCITY (measure of bradykinesia) and \nIRREGULARITY (measure of fluctuations in movement amplitude) were used to assess \nRAM performance. Results showed that DPD patients had greater WBM than NDPD and \ncontrol groups during rest and RAM performance. There were no differences in \nperformance between NDPD and DPD groups for RANGE, DURATION and \nVELOCITY, despite significant longer disease duration for the DPD group (DPD = 15.5 \n± 6.2 years versus NDPD = 6.6 ± 2.6 years). However, both the NDPD and DPD groups \nshowed lower RANGE, longer DURATION, and reduced VELOCITY compared to \ncontrols,, suggesting the presence of bradykinesia and hypokinesia. In the case of \nIRREGULARITY, DPD patients showed clear fluctuations in movement amplitude \ncompared to the NDPD and control groups. However, the lack of correlation between \nWBM and IRREGULARITY within the DPD group (Spearman's rank order, Rho - 0.31, \np > 0.05), suggests that DID was not the primary cause of the fluctuating movementamplitude observed in that group. In conclusion, these findings suggest that DID may \ncoexists with bradykinesia and hypokinesia, but that they are not inevitably accompanied \nwith worsening motor performance.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".