Cognitive profile of Parkinson's disease patients: a comparative study between early-onset and late-onset Parkinson's disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To investigate the influence of onset age on the occurrence and progression of cognitive dysfunction using neuropsychological tests and the electrophysiological component P300 in both early-onset Parkinson's disease (EOPD) and late-onset Parkinson's disease (LOPD) patients. METHODS: A cohort of 76 EOPD patients and 166 LOPD patients was recruited for this study. Demographic information and clinical features, including age, disease duration, education level, family history, the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale, the Hoehn and Yahr stage, and depression scores were documented for each patient. The Mini-Mental State Examination, Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale - Revised, Chinese version (WAIS-RC) and Wechsler Memory Scale - Revised, Chinese version (WMS-RC) were used. In addition, P300 was also examined to assess cognitive function. RESULTS: Although EOPD patients had longer disease duration, their cognitive dysfunction progressed more slowly. The MoCA tests revealed that EOPD patients had higher scores in visuospatial function, attention, delayed recall, and orientation than the LOPD patients. The difference between the two groups on the WMS-RC test did not reach significance, whereas the scores in executive function, visuospatial function and attention as measured on the WAIS-RC test were significantly lower in the LOPD group. In addition, P300 latencies were markedly delayed and P300 amplitudes were reduced in the LOPD group. CONCLUSIONS: The current findings demonstrated that cognitive dysfunction progressed more slowly in the EOPD group. Although the LOPD patients exhibited shorter disease durations, their cognitive abilities, including executive function, visuospatial function and attention, may have been impaired.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".