Impairments of speed and amplitude of movement in Parkinson's disease: A pilot study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bradykinesia, characterized by slowness and decreased amplitude of movement, is often considered the most important deficit in Parkinson's disease (PD). The current clinical rating of bradykinesia in PD, based on the motor subscale of the Unified Parkinson's disease Rating Scale (UPDRS-III), does not individually weigh the impairments in speed and amplitude of rapid alternating movements. We sought to categorize movement in PD to determine whether speed and amplitude have different relationships to current measures of motor impairment and disability. Categories of speed and amplitude (normal, slow/low, and very-slow/very-low) were ascertained using an electromagnetic tracking device. Amplitude was disproportionally more affected than speed in the "off" state. UPDRS-III and the Schwab & England disability scale were worst in patients with very impaired amplitude and best in patients with normal amplitude. A similarly graded relationship was not found for categories of speed impairment. The examiner clinical global impression of change mirrored "off" state amplitude but not speed categories. Levodopa, however, normalized speed to a greater extent than amplitude. Our observations suggest that amplitude and speed impairments may be associated with different functional aspects in PD and deserve separate clinical assessment.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".