Measuring mild cognitive impairment in patients with Parkinson's disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We examined the frequency of Parkinson disease with mild cognitive impairment (PD-MCI) and its subtypes and the accuracy of 3 cognitive scales for detecting PD-MCI using the new criteria for PD-MCI proposed by the Movement Disorders Society. Nondemented patients with Parkinson's disease completed a clinical visit with the 3 screening tests followed 1 to 3 weeks later by neuropsychological testing. Of 139 patients, 46 met Level 2 Task Force criteria for PD-MCI when impaired performance was based on comparisons with normative scores. Forty-two patients (93%) had multi-domain MCI. At the lowest cutoff levels that provided at least 80% sensitivity, specificity was 44% for the Montreal Cognitive Assessment and 33% for the Scales for Outcomes in Parkinson's Disease-Cognition. The Mini-Mental State Examination could not achieve 80% sensitivity at any cutoff score. At the highest cutoff levels that provided specificity of at least 80%, sensitivities were low (≤44%) for all tests. When decline from estimated premorbid levels was considered evidence of cognitive impairment, 110 of 139 patients were classified with PD-MCI, and 103 (94%) had multi-domain MCI. We observed dramatic differences in the proportion of patients who had PD-MCI using the new Level 2 criteria, depending on whether or not decline from premorbid level of intellectual function was considered. Recommendations for methods of operationalizing decline from premorbid levels constitute an unmet need. Among the 3 screening tests examined, none of the instruments provided good combined sensitivity and specificity for PD-MCI. Other tests recommended by the Task Force Level 1 criteria may represent better choices, and these should be the subject of future research.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".