Correlative factors of cognitive dysfunction in PD patients: a cross-sectional study from Southwest China
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cognitive dysfunction is common in Parkinson's disease (PD). A comprehensive understanding of cognitive dysfunction and its correlative factors in Chinese PD patients were not available. METHODS: This cross-sectional study included 454 PD patients. Cognitive function was evaluated using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment. Non-motor symptoms were assessed using the Non-Motor Symptoms Scale (NMSS), and depression and anxiety were assessed using the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale and the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale, respectively. RESULTS: Cognitive dysfunction was observed in 58.1% of the patients. The mean age, age of onset, scores of rigidity, bradykinesia, axial impairment, tremor, speech and facial expression, total Unified PD Rating Scale part III and H&Y stage, and NMSS scores were significantly higher in PD patients with cognitive dysfunction than in those without cognitive dysfunction. The prevalence of sleep/fatigue domain with the item 'difficulty falling asleep', mood/apathy domain with the item 'feelings of nervousness', perceptual problems/hallucinations domain with the item 'delusions', attention/memory domain with the items 'concentration' and 'forget to do things', gastrointestinal domain with the items 'dribbling saliva' and 'swallowing', urinary domain with the item 'nocturia', and the item 'taste or smell' in the miscellaneous domain were significantly higher in PD patients with cognitive dysfunction. Logistic regression indicated that female sex, older age, lower education level, higher bradykinesia score, and presence of the urinary domain were associated with cognitive dysfunction in PD. CONCLUSIONS: Age, sex, education level, bradykinesia score, and presence of urinary symptoms are correlative factors of cognitive dysfunction in Chinese 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".