Odor identification deficits are associated with increased risk of neuropsychiatric complications in patients with Parkinson's disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Olfactory deficits appear early in the course of Parkinson's disease (PD) but their prognostic significance is not known. The goal of this study was to determine whether the severity of olfactory impairment is associated with subsequent risk of developing complications of PD. One hundred patients with PD self-administered the University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (UPSIT). Testing was done, on average, 3.6 years from the time of initial diagnosis. The incidence of neuropsychiatric features of PD, including cognitive decline and visual hallucinations, was ascertained through chart review after an average of 6.8 years of follow-up. Incidence of motor outcomes including falls and dyskinesias was also obtained. There was a significant trend for increased risk of neuropsychiatric complications across declining quartiles of olfactory test scores. In addition, subjects in the lowest quartile of olfactory performance had a significantly higher adjusted risk of hallucinations (HR = 4.70, 95% CI 1.64, 13.42) and cognitive decline (HR = 3.10, 95% CI 1.05, 9.21) than those in the reference quartile. There was no association between olfactory dysfunction and dyskinesias, and a very modest association with risk of falls. These findings suggest that severity of olfactory impairment early in the disease course may be a useful marker for the risk of neuropsychiatric complications of 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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".