MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2016494578 · doi:10.1016/j.jalz.2012.05.463

P1‐185: White matter disease adversely influences cognition in idiopathic Parkinson's disease

2012· article· en· W2016494578 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Amanda Ng, Ivane Chew, Kay Yaw Tay, Wing Lok Au, Louis C.S. Tan, Nagaendran Kandiah

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicParkinson's Disease Mechanisms and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineHyperintensityParkinson's diseaseCognitionDiseaseDemographicsCohortDiabetes mellitusPhysical therapyMagnetic resonance imagingPsychiatryEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cross sectional MR data have demonstrated white matter hyperintensity to independently contribute to cognitive impairment in MCI, AD and VaD. The influence of WMH on the cognitive status of PD patients has not been adequately studied. We aim to investigate the relationship between cognitive scores and WMH in Idiopathic Parkinson's disease. Cross-sectional analysis of a longitudinal study cohort. Patients diagnosed with Parkinson's disease using UK brain bank criteria, who fulfilled inclusion/exclusion criteria, were recruited from NNI Outpatient clinic between April and Dec 2011. Demographics, clinical information and scores on cognitive tests were collected. All patients underwent a 3T MRI scan, and Axial FLAIR sequences were scored for WMH using the modified Fazeka's scale (0-12). 66 PD patients - 33 Low WMH (Fazeka's score<4), 33 Mod-High WMH (Fazeka's ≥4) were identified. Both groups were comparable on age (Mean = 63.58years vs 66.64, P = 0.10), gender (66.67% Male vs 69.7%, P = 0.79), race (81.82% Chinese vs 90.91%, P = 0.28), years of education (10.64 vs 9.87, P = 0.32) and vascular risk factors (diabetes, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, smoking). Cognitive scores were poorer in the Mod-High group compared to low WMH group, even though they had shorter disease duration (4.47yrs vs 7.01yrs), less motor symptoms (UPDRS motor sub-score 16.25 vs 20.32) and were in the milder stage of disease (Hoehn & Yahr 1.82 vs 2.03). The Mod-High WMH group had lower scores on the Mini-Mental State Examination (27.45 vs 28.3), Montreal Cognitive Assessment (25.42 vs 27.03), Frontal Assessment Battery (16.12 vs 17.03) and Digit Span (16.16 vs 17.25), but the differences were significant, or approaching significance, only in the MoCA (P = 0.06) and FAB (P = 0.01) The Mod-High group were also consistently slower, albeit not statistically significant, on timed tasks - 100.81s vs 92.81s on Colour Trail 1, 162.23 vs 152.03 on Colour Trail 2, and 22.16s vs 19.19s on Maze. Further analysis showed that MoCA and FAB were negatively correlated with periventricular WMH (R = -0.266, P = 0.042 and R = -0.285, P = 0.029 respectively), but not with deep subcortical WMH. PD patients with Mod-High WMH have poorer cognitive scores, especially in executive functioning (e.g. FAB and Maze). Periventricular WMH appears to adversely influence cognition in idiopathic PD.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.246 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & DementiaSame topicParkinson's Disease Mechanisms and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207