A Brief Clinical Assessment of Cognitive Deficit with Impaired Daily Living Functioning in Parkinson’s Patients with and without Dementia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cognitive decline in Parkinson’s disease (PD) is defined as dementia which affects activities of daily living (ADL) function. Dementia is one of the recognized issues in the treatment of Parkinson’s disease patients (PDP) as it is becoming a major contributor to morbidity. The objective of our study was to evaluate the cognitive decline in Parkinson’s disease patients (PDP) and the influence of cognition on daily living function deterioration in cognitively impaired and cognitively unimpaired PDP. Cognitively impaired PDP (n = 24), and cognitively unimpaired PDP (n = 16) were administered MoCA and MMSE performance based tests for cognitive measurements and Alzheimer’s Disease Cooperative Study Activities of Daily Living Inventory (ADCS-ADL) to determine everyday functioning. The significances of MoCA and MMSE among cognitively impaired PDP and cognitively unimpaired PDP in univariant analysis were P < 0.001 and P < 0.05. In partial correlation, MoCA was strongly related to ADL function as compare to MMSE (r = 0.623, P = 0.001). Cognitively impaired PDP showed significantly lower score on visuo-construction and attention. Among all variables of MoCA domains, attention is strongly associated with instrumental activity daily living (IADL) scores (logistic regression coefficient = 0.672, P = 0.01). These results suggest that dementia affects daily living performances especially the IADL tasks like attention and execution. Therefore, the assessment of complex daily activities particularly IADL is probably useful for the diagnosis of early stage cognitive impairment in PDP. Further MMSE test is less sensitive than MoCA for detecting significant cognitive decline in PDP and impaired attention is an important determinant of ADL functions in cognitively impaired PDP.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".