Verbal memory in drug-naive, newly diagnosed Parkinson's disease. The retrieval deficit hypothesis revisited.
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The retrieval deficit hypothesis on memory impairment in patients with Parkinson's disease (PD) implies a selective impairment in recall of learned material with normal encoding, retention, and recognition. This hypothesis has been challenged by new data. We have therefore investigated verbal memory and learning in a large sample of newly diagnosed, drug naïve, non-demented patients with PD. METHOD: From a sample of patients with PD from the Norwegian ParkWest study, 133 PD patients and 133 controls matched on sex, age, and education were included. The California Verbal Learning Test-2 (CVLT-2) was used to assess verbal memory. RESULTS: Patients performed significantly worse than controls on free and cued recall as well as on recognition memory. Patients used the semantic clustering learning strategy significantly less extensively than the controls and the learning slope of the PD patients was significantly less steep. There was no difference in retention when controlling for encoding. Patients did not perform better on the recognition measure or on cued recall (d-prime), as compared to free recall. Executive functions explained a substantial part of the memory deficits. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that memory impairment in drug naïve early PD to a large degree is a deficit of learning/ encoding and not of retention or retrieval. An implication is that the retrieval deficit hypothesis should be moderated in its general form. Executive deficits and less extensive use of the efficient semantic clustering learning strategy had a strong impact on learning and memory.
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.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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 it