MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2166681050 · doi:10.1111/jon.12030

Similar Circuits but Different Connectivity Patterns Between The Cerebellum, Basal Ganglia, and Supplementary Motor Area In Early Parkinson's Disease Patients and Controls During Predictive Motor Timing

2013· article· en· W2166681050 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuroimaging · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Music Perception
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersEuropean Regional Development Fund
KeywordsBasal gangliaMedicineNeuroscienceParkinson's diseaseCerebellumMotor symptomsBasal (medicine)DiseasePhysical medicine and rehabilitationInternal medicineCentral nervous systemPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The cerebellum, basal ganglia (BG), and other cortical regions, such as supplementary motor area (SMA) have emerged as important structures dealing with various aspects of timing, yet the modulation of functional connectivity between them during motor timing tasks remains unexplored. METHODS: We used dynamic causal modeling to investigate the differences in effective connectivity (EC) between these regions and its modulation by behavioral outcome during a motor timing prediction task in a group of 16 patients with early Parkinson's disease (PD) and 17 healthy controls. Behavioral events (hits and errors) constituted the driving input connected to the cerebellum, and the modulation in connectivity was assessed relative to the hit condition (successful interception of target). RESULTS: The driving input elicited response in the target area, while modulatory input changed the specific connection strength. The neuroimaging data revealed similar structure of intrinsic connectivity in both groups with unidirectional connections from cerebellum to both sides of the BG, from BG to the SMA, and then from SMA to the cerebellum. However, the type of intrinsic connection was different between two groups. In the PD group, the connection between the SMA and cerebellum was inhibitory in comparison to the HC group, where the connection was activated. Furthermore, the modulation of connectivity by the performance in the task was different between the two groups, with decreased connectivity between the cerebellum and left BG and SMA and a more pronounced symmetry of these connections in controls. In the same time, there was an increased EC between the cerebellum and both sides of BG with more pronounced asymmetry (stronger connection with left BG) in patients. In addition, in the PD group the modulatory input strengthened inhibitory connectivity between the SMA and the cerebellum, while in the HC group the excitatory connection was slightly strengthened. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate that although early PD subjects and controls use similar functional circuits to maintain a successful outcome in predictive motor timing behavior, the type and strength of EC and its modulation by behavioral performance differ between these two groups. These functional differences might represent the first step of cortical reorganization aimed at maintaining a normal performance in the brain affected by early Parkinson's disease and may have implications for the neuro-rehabilitation field.

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.

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 score0.265
Threshold uncertainty score0.659

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.214 · 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