MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1808500007 · doi:10.1002/ana.24181

Enhanced creative thinking under dopaminergic therapy in Parkinson disease

2014· article· en· W1808500007 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Achinoam Faust‐Socher, Yoed N. Kenett, Oren Cohen, Sharon Hassin‐Baer, Rivka Inzelberg

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Neurology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCreativity in Education and Neuroscience
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyCreativityDopaminergicTorrance Tests of Creative ThinkingFluencyVerbal fluency testAudiologyClinical psychologyWechsler Adult Intelligence ScaleLevodopaCognitionRating scaleParkinson's diseaseDevelopmental psychologyDiseaseInternal medicineMedicinePsychiatryCreative thinkingDopamineNeuroscienceNeuropsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Creative thinking requires a combination of originality, flexibility, and usefulness. Several reports described enhanced artistic creativity in Parkinson disease (PD) patients treated with dopaminergic agents. We aimed to examine PD patients' ability to perform creativity tasks compared to healthy controls and to verify whether creativity is related to an impulse control disorder (ICD) as a complication of dopaminergic therapy. METHODS: Right-handed PD patients treated with dopamine agonists and/or levodopa, and age- and education- matched neurologically healthy controls were assessed using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment, semantic verbal fluency, Beck Depression Inventory, and Questionnaire for Impulsive-Compulsive Disorders in Parkinson Disease Rating Scale (QUIP-RS). Creativity assessment included Comprehension of Novel Metaphors (CNM), Remote Association Test, and Tel Aviv Creativity Test (TACT). Groups were compared using analyses of variance, t tests, and correlation analyses. RESULTS: Twenty-seven PD patients (age, mean ± standard deviation = 62 ± 7 years; education = 16 ± 3 years; disease duration = 5.8 ± 3.9 years) and 27 controls (age = 59 ± 9 years; education 17 ± 3 years) participated. PD patients performed significantly better than controls in divergent thinking tasks; specifically, the TACT-Visual for both fluency (33.48 ± 11.83 vs 25.59 ± 10.27, p = 0.034) and quality (15.78 ± 7.6 vs 11.19 ± 6.22, p = 0.025). Comprehension of Novel Metaphors was better in PD patients vs controls (0.71 ± 0.23 vs 0.55 ± 0.29, p = 0.04). QUIP-RS scores did not correlate with creativity measures. INTERPRETATION: PD patients treated with dopaminergic drugs demonstrated enhanced verbal and visual creativity as compared to neurologically healthy controls. This feature was unrelated to ICD. Dopaminergic agents might act through the reduction of latent inhibition, resulting in widening of the associative network and enriched divergent thinking.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.083
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.309 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations78
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of NeurologySame topicCreativity in Education and NeuroscienceFrench-language works237,207