Neuropsychological correlates of alexithymia in Parkinson's disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There are recent reports that alexithymia may be associated with brain dysfunction involving frontal lobes or right hemisphere regions. However, little is known about the relationship between alexithymia and cognitive deficits in Parkinson's disease (PD). The authors investigated the neuropsychological correlates of alexithymia in a population of 70 nondemented PD patients and 70 controls. Alexithymia was screened using the 20-item version of the Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20). Standardized scales that measure verbal episodic memory, executive functions, abstract reasoning, and visual-spatial and language abilities were adopted. PD patients with alexithymia performed worse than both PD patients without alexithymia and controls with or without alexithymia on tasks requiring visual-spatial processing. Moreover, regression analyses showed that, in PD patients, but not in controls, poor performance on a constructional praxis task predicted high scores on the TAS-20 subscale, which assesses difficulty in identifying emotions. These data evidence an association between alexithymia and visual-spatial processing alterations in PD patients, supporting the view that the right hemisphere could be specifically involved in the modulation of some facets of alexithymia.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".