MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2156490444 · doi:10.1037/0894-4105.19.1.106

Study of Verbal Working Memory in Patients With Parkinson's Disease.

2005· article· en· W2156490444 on OpenAlexaff
Brigitte Gilbert, Sylvie Belleville, Louis Bherer, Sylvain Chouinard

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuropsychology · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicParkinson's Disease Mechanisms and Treatments
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de MontréalInstitut Universitaire de Gériatrie de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWorking memoryPsychomotor learningPsychologyVerbal memoryAudiologyDementiaMemory spanExecutive functionsPsychomotor disorderTask (project management)Parkinson's diseaseCognitive psychologyCognitionDevelopmental psychologyDiseasePsychiatryMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The authors examined the nature of the working memory deficit in persons with Parkinson's disease (PD). Three hypotheses were tested: a limited storage capacity, an impaired executive component, and a reduction of psychomotor speed. Verbal working memory was assessed in 14 PD patients without dementia and 14 matched control participants. Participants were administered a classical verbal span test, working memory tasks that required either updating or manipulation capacities, and motor and psychomotor speed tasks. Patients' performance was comparable to that of control participants on the verbal span test. However, results on the working memory tasks indicated a deficit in manipulation with normal updating capacities. Motor and psychomotor slowing were found in the patient group, but slowing could not fully account for the impairment observed in the manipulation task. Results indicated that there is a genuine but selective working memory impairment in patients with PD.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.552

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.253 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations60
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuropsychologySame topicParkinson's Disease Mechanisms and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207