Salience network and parahippocampal dopamine dysfunction in memory‐impaired Parkinson disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Patients with Parkinson disease (PD) and mild cognitive impairment (MCI) are vulnerable to dementia and frequently experience memory deficits. This could be the result of dopamine dysfunction in corticostriatal networks (salience, central executive networks, and striatum) and/or the medial temporal lobe. Our aim was to investigate whether dopamine dysfunction in these regions contributes to memory impairment in PD. METHODS: We used positron emission tomography imaging to compare D2 receptor availability in the cortex and striatal (limbic and associative) dopamine neuron integrity in 4 groups: memory-impaired PD (amnestic MCI; n = 9), PD with nonamnestic MCI (n = 10), PD without MCI (n = 11), and healthy controls (n = 14). Subjects were administered a full neuropsychological test battery for cognitive performance. RESULTS: Memory-impaired patients demonstrated more significant reductions in D2 receptor binding in the salience network (insular cortex and anterior cingulate cortex [ACC] and the right parahippocampal gyrus [PHG]) compared to healthy controls and patients with no MCI. They also presented reductions in the right insula and right ACC compared to nonamnestic MCI patients. D2 levels were correlated with memory performance in the right PHG and left insula of amnestic patients and with executive performance in the bilateral insula and left ACC of all MCI patients. Associative striatal dopamine denervation was significant in all PD patients. INTERPRETATION: Dopaminergic differences in the salience network and the medial temporal lobe contribute to memory impairment in PD. Furthermore, these findings indicate the vulnerability of the salience network in PD and its potential role in memory and executive dysfunction.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".