Decision-making under ambiguity in patients with early Parkinson's disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To investigate the ability of decision making under ambiguity condition in patients with early Parkinson's disease(PD) and explore the relationship of this deficiency with other cognitive function and damage to the basal ganglia.Method Twenty patients with early PD,20 patients with infarction in the right basal ganglia(BGI) and 20 age-and gender-matched healthy controls were included in the present study.The ability of decision-making under ambiguity was analyzed using Iowa Gambling Task(IGT).The general background cognitive functions in all subjects were assessed using Montreal Cognitive Assessment(MoCA),Digital Span(DS) and Stroop test.The correlation of IGT scores with the general background cognitive functions was analyzed.Results There was significant difference in Stroop test scores among the three groups(F = 33.27,P 0.05).PD group(21.35 ± 4.28) performed significantly worse on Stroop task than the BGI group(13.30 ± 3.21) and healthy control group(13.60 ± 2.98)(P 0.05).There was significant difference in IGT task scores among the three group(F = 5.38,P 0.05).The total number of advantageous choice in IGT were significantly lower in PD group(48.95 ± 7.01) than the BGI group(52.95 ± 2.72) and healthy control group(53.15 ± 2.43)(P 0.05).There is no significant difference in either Stroop test or IGT test between the BGI group and healthy control group(P 0.05).The frequency of choosing the advantage options in IGT was correlated with Stroop test in PD group(r =-0.65,P 0.05).Conclusions Our study shows that early PD patients have significant impairments in the ability of decision-making ? under ambiguity as well as executive function and decision-making?ability impairment is correlated with the decreased executive function.Isolated ischemic damage to the basal ganglia has no remarkable influence on decision-making ability under ambiguity and executive function.The malfunction of decision-making? under ambiguity in early PD may be associated with the damage in the brain regions other than basal ganglia.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".