Impulsive-compulsive behaviors in <i>parkin</i> -associated Parkinson disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this multicenter, case-control study was to investigate the prevalence and severity of impulsive-compulsive behaviors (ICBs) in a cohort of patients with parkin-associated Parkinson disease (PD) compared to a group of patients without the mutation. METHODS: We compared 22 patients with biallelic parkin mutations (parkin-PD) and 26 patients negative for parkin, PINK1, DJ-1, and GBA mutations (PD-NM), matched for age at onset, disease duration, levodopa, and dopamine agonist equivalent daily dose. A semistructured interview was used to diagnose each of the following ICBs: compulsive sexual behavior, compulsive buying, binge eating, punding, hobbyism, and compulsive medication use. The Questionnaire for Impulsive-Compulsive Disorders in Parkinson's Disease-Rating Scale (QUIP-RS) was adopted to rate ICB severity. RESULTS: Frequency of patients with at least one ICB was comparable between parkin-PD and PD-NM. Nevertheless, when analyzing the distribution of specific ICBs, a higher frequency of compulsive shopping, binge eating, and punding/hobbyism was found in the parkin-PD group. Compared to PD-NM, parkin-PD patients with ICB had younger onset age and higher frequency of smokers; in 5 patients, ICB had predated PD onset. Total and partial (compulsive buying, compulsive sexual behavior, binge eating, hobbyism/punding) QUIP-RS scores were higher in patients with parkin-PD compared to patients with PD-NM. Logistic regression analysis showed that the presence of parkin mutations was associated with smoking status and higher QUIP-RS total score. CONCLUSIONS: Our data expand the parkin-associated phenotypic spectrum demonstrating higher frequency and severity of specific ICBs, and suggesting an association between the parkin genotype, smoking status, and ICB severity.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".