MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2341680841 · doi:10.1155/2016/3217960

Structural Neuroimaging Markers of Cognitive Decline in Parkinson’s Disease

2016· review· en· W2341680841 on OpenAlexafffund
Alexandru Hanganu, Oury Monchi

Bibliographic record

VenueParkinson s Disease · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicParkinson's Disease Mechanisms and Treatments
Canadian institutionsInstitut Universitaire de Gériatrie de MontréalMcGill UniversityHotchkiss Brain InstituteUniversité de MontréalUniversity of Calgary
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchParkinson Society Canada
KeywordsDementiaNeuroimagingMedicineDiseaseCognitionParkinson's diseaseCognitive declineCognitive impairmentPsychiatryPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cognitive impairment in patients with Parkinson's disease is a major challenge since it has been established that 25 to 40% of patients will develop cognitive impairment early in the disease. Furthermore, it has been reported that up to 80% of Parkinsonian patients will eventually develop dementia. Thus, it is important to improve the diagnosing procedures in order to detect cognitive impairment at early stages of development and to delay as much as possible the developing of dementia. One major challenge is that patients with mild cognitive impairment exhibit measurable cognitive deficits according to recently established criteria, yet those deficits are not severe enough to interfere with daily living, hence being avoided by patients, and might be overseen by clinicians. Recent advances in neuroimaging brain analysis allowed the establishment of several anatomical markers that have the potential to be considered for early detection of cognitive impairment in Parkinsonian patients. This review aims to outline the neuroimaging possibilities in diagnosing cognitive impairment in patients with Parkinson's disease and to take into consideration the near-future possibilities of their implementation into clinical practice.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.908
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.297 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations14
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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