Interhemispheric and ipsilateral connections in Parkinson's disease: Relation to mirror movements
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mirror movements (MM) occur in early, asymmetric Parkinson's disease (PD). To examine the pathophysiology of MM in PD, we studied 13 PD patients with MM (PD-MM), 7 PD patients without MM (PD-NM), and 14 normal subjects. Cross-correlogram did not detect common synaptic input to motoneuron pools innervating homologous hand muscles in PD-MM patients. Transcranial magnetic stimulation studies showed no significant difference in ipsilateral motor-evoked potentials between PD-MM patients and normal subjects. The MM side of PD-MM patients showed a slower increase in ipsilateral silent period area with higher level of muscle contraction than the non-MM side and normal subjects. There was less interhemispheric inhibition (IHI) at long interstimulus intervals of 20 to 50 ms in PD-MM than PD-NM. IHI reduced short interval intracortical inhibition in normal subjects and PD-NM, but not in PD-MM. IHI significantly increased intracortical facilitation in PD-MM and PD-NM patients, but not in normal subjects. Our results suggest that MM in PD is due to activation of the contralateral motor cortex. PD-MM patients had reduced transcallosal inhibitory effects on cortical output neurons and on intracortical inhibitory circuits compared to PD-NM patients and controls. These deficits in transcallosal inhibition may contribute to MM 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".