Unilateral versus bilateral tasks in early asymmetric Parkinson's disease: Differential effects on bradykinesia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Patients with Parkinson's disease (PD) have an impaired ability to perform two different simultaneous bimanual tasks. The differential effects of unilateral versus bilateral identical tasks on the bradykinesia scores of the more and less affected limbs in PD have not been examined. Twenty-seven patients with early and asymmetric PD underwent blinded, videotaped assessment, independently for each limb, using the bradykinesia items of the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Part III, Motor subscale (mUPDRS) and a Modified Bradykinesia Rating Scale (MBRS), which assessed amplitude, speed, and rhythm of movements. We found that the score for finger tapping in mUPDRS and MBRS, the score of amplitude of finger tapping in MBRS, and the lateralized scores of mUPDRS (sum of Items 23 to 25) of the most affected side significantly improved during the bimanual task. The improvement was associated with longer duration of illness, higher total scores in mUPDRS, and higher lateralized bradykinesia scores of the most affected side. There was a simultaneous deterioration of the lateralized bradykinesia scores in MBRS (sum of Items 23 to 25) and Item 25 of mUPDRS (rapid alternating movements) of the least affected side in bimanual tasks. In conclusion, identical bimanual tasks facilitate movement of the most affected side in early asymmetric PD at the cost of motor degradation in the least affected side. This observation also highlights the need to perform tasks of bradykinesia in one limb at a time for best accuracy.
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".