Effect of Pramipexole on Cognitive Functions in Restless Legs Syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: Neuropsychological evaluations have revealed cognitive dysfunction in restless legs syndrome (RLS) patients, especially frontal lobe functions.Although dopamine agonists improve RLS sensory symptoms and periodic leg movements during sleep, there was no study regarding the effects of dopamine agonist on cognition in patients with RLS.Methods: Sixteen drug-naïve RLS patients were enrolled.They underwent sleep questionnaires, Beck Depression Inventory, and neuropsychological evaluation, consisting of Rey Complex Figure Test and recognition trial (RCFT), Korean-California Verbal Learning Test, Controlled Oral Word Association Test (COWAT) before and after treatment with pramipexole (PMP).PMP was administered over a period of 12 weeks every night 1 h before bedtime.Paired Student's t-test and Spearman's correlation analysis were used for analyses.Results: After treatment with PMP, the International RLS Severity Scale score was significantly decreased.Sleep quality and depression also significantly improved after the treatment.RCFT immediate recall, COWAT phoneme word frequency, and digit symbol coding scores significantly improved compared to those before the treatment (17.72±7.84 vs. 20.13±7.33,p=0.05; 36.50±12.62 vs. 41.50±12.58,p=0.03; 68.19±21.11vs. 73.81±21.11,p=0.02, respectively).There were no significant correlations between changes in clinical variables and in cognitive functions before and after the treatment.Conclusions: This study suggests that treatment with PMP in RLS patients improves not only RLS sensory symptoms, but also cognitive functions.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".