Stereopsis in Drug Naïve Parkinson's Disease Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Motor deficits associated with Parkinson's disease (PD) have been well described, yet little attention has been paid to non-motor symptoms, especially cortical visual dysfunction. We investigated stereopsis, as well as the relationship between stereopsis and other cognitive function, in a sample of PD patients. METHODS: We used Titmus stereotest plates for assessing stereopsis. Fifty-nine subjects (29 PD patients and 30 normal controls) were included in this study. The included patients underwent a neurological examination, clinical rating scale and neuropsychological tests. RESULTS: Drug naïve PD patients showed decreased stereopsis on the Titmus fly stereopsis test (Pearson χ2=23.80, p<0.001) compared to PD patients with normal stereopsis. The Hoehn-Yahr stages and Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale motor scores were significantly higher in patients with PD with abnormal stereopsis than in patients with PD with normal stereopsis (p=0.026; p=0.046). The frequency of abnormal visual perception/constructive function was greater in patients with PD with abnormal stereopsis compared to patients with PD with normal stereopsis (Pearson χ2=5.11, p=0.024). CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that stereopsis deficits and visual perception/constructive dysfunction are common in de novo PD patients.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".