Bibliographic record
Abstract
While motor-system abnormalities are the defining features of PD, cognitive and neuropsychiatric symptoms are of major importance.1,2⇓ Disturbances in mood and motivation, such as depression, apathy, anxiety, impulsivity, and mood lability, are particularly common. These behavior changes can be seen early in the course of PD and may antedate motor dysfunction, providing empirical evidence for an “organic” rather than reactive etiology. Postmortem and in vivo biochemical as well as neuroimaging studies lend support to this hypothesis, with mesolimbic dopamine and serotonin abnormalities and fronto-limbic dysfunction demonstrated in affected patient subgroups.3 Neuropsychiatric symptoms can also begin later in the illness suggesting that additional factors, acting in concert with ongoing neurodegenerative changes, are important in their etiology. These factors include progressive and fluctuating motor symptoms, medication side effects, premorbid personality traits, psychosocial stressors, and the presence of medical, neurologic, and psychiatric comorbidity.4 It is not yet clear how these factors interact or which are most critical, a fact underscored by the absence of neurobehavioral signs in many patients with seemingly comparable disease features and risk factors. Nonetheless, most neuropsychiatric syndromes are usually attributed to selective dysfunction of specific prefrontal and limbic cortical-striatal-thalamic pathways.5 This conceptual approach directly parallels strategies used to delineate physiologic and biochemic abnormalities mediating motor symptoms.6 Classic lesion-deficit studies support such links, with onset of depression, mania, …
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.068 | 0.046 |
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".