Correlation of Sleep Disturbance and Cognitive Impairment in Patients with Parkinson’s Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Cognitive impairment is a common nonmotor symptom of Parkinson's disease (PD) and is associated with high mortality, caregiver distress, and nursing home placement. The risk factors for cognitive decline in PD patients include advanced age, longer disease duration, rapid eye movement sleep behavior disorder, hallucinations, excessive daytime sleepiness, and nontremor symptoms including bradykinesia, rigidity, postural instability, and gait disturbance. We conducted a cross-sectional study to determine which types of sleep disturbances are related to cognitive function in PD patients. METHODS: A total of 71 PD patients (29 males, mean age 66.46 ± 8.87 years) were recruited. All patients underwent the Mini- Mental State Examination (MMSE) and the Korean Version of the Montreal Cognitive Assessments (MoCA-K) to assess global cognitive function. Sleep disorders were evaluated with the Stanford Sleepiness Scale, Epworth Sleepiness Scale, Insomnia Severity Index (ISI), Pittsburg Sleep Quality Index, and Parkinson's Disease Sleep Scale in Korea (PDSS). RESULTS: The ISI was correlated with the MMSE, and total PDSS scores were correlated with the MMSE and the MoCA-K. In each item of the PDSS, nocturnal restlessness, vivid dreams, hallucinations, and nocturnal motor symptoms were positively correlated with the MMSE, and nocturnal restlessness and vivid dreams were significantly related to the MoCA-K. Vivid dreams and nocturnal restlessness are considered the most powerful correlation factors with global cognitive function, because they commonly had significant correlation to cognition assessed with both the MMSE and the MoCA-K. CONCLUSIONS: We found a correlation between global cognitive function and sleep disturbances, including vivid dreams and nocturnal restlessness, in PD patients.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".