Visual dysfunction in Parkinson disease without dementia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the profiles of visual dysfunction and their relationship to motor and cognitive dysfunction and to disability in mild to moderate Parkinson disease (PD) without dementia. METHODS: Seventy-six independently living participants with mild to moderate PD and 161 neurologically normal older adults were studied using a comprehensive battery to assess visual acuity, contrast sensitivity (CS), visual speed of processing and attention, spatial and motion perception, visual and verbal memory, visuoconstructional abilities, executive functions, depression, and motor function. RESULTS: Participants with PD scored significantly worse on all tests of vision and cognition compared with normal elderly persons. Reduced CS contributed to deficits on tests of spatial and motion perception and attention in participants with PD. Impairments in visual attention and spatial perception predicted worse cognitive function. Worse performances on tests of visual speed of processing and attention, spatial and motion perception, visual construction, and executive functions correlated with measures of postural instability and gait difficulty (in the Motor section of the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale). Impairments in motor function, visual memory, mood, and executive functions predicted worse disability as measured by Schwab-England Activities of Daily Living Scale. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with mild to moderate Parkinson disease showed impaired visual perception and cognition compared with elderly control subjects. Visual dysfunction contributes to parkinsonian disability through its influences on cognition and locomotion.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".