Evaluating the Link Between Dopaminergic Treatment, Gait Impairment, and Anxiety in Parkinson's Disease
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Anxiety is the most under‐recognized nonmotor symptom of Parkinson's disease ( PD ), yet it is unclear whether motor impairment exacerbates anxiety observed in PD , or vice versa. The current study examined: (1) whether movement (i.e., walking vs. standing) elevates distress in PD ; (2) how dopaminergic treatment influences anxiety specifically while walking; and (3) whether these responses are worse in PD patients with gait impairments (compared to those without). Methods Twenty healthy control participants ( HC ), 17 PD participants without gait impairments ( PD ‐ GI ), and 14 PD participants with gait impairments ( PD + GI ) performed two tasks (stand vs. walk) in two virtual environments: (1) LOW threat; (2) HIGH threat. This protocol was completed in on and off dopaminergic states (to evaluate the effect of exacerbating motor symptoms). Results PD + GI reported greater levels of anxiety compared to PD ‐ GI and HC overall. All participants reported greater levels of anxiety and had higher skin conductance levels ( SCL s) when walking compared to standing. The HIGH threat condition also generated greater levels of anxiety in all participants, compared to LOW threat, especially when required to walk. Notably, only PD+GI reported greater levels of anxiety when walking compared to standing in the LOW threat environment. Dopaminergic medication reduced self‐reported levels of anxiety, but did not significantly change SCL . Conclusion This study provides evidence that movement exacerbates anxiety in all older adults, but is particularly influential in those with gait impairments, which emphasizes the importance of optimally treating movement impairments as a method of reducing movement driven anxiety.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 it