The pattern of verbal, visuospatial and procedural learning in Richardson variant of progressive supranuclear palsy in comparison to Parkinson’s disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Progressive supranuclear palsy (PSP) is regarded either within spectrum of atypical parkinsonian syndromes or frontotemporal lobar degeneration. We compared the verbal, visuospatial and procedural learning profiles in patients with PSP and Parkinson's disease (PD). Furthermore, the relationship between executive factors (initiation and inhibition) and learning outcomes was analyzed. METHODS: Thirty-three patients with the clinical diagnosis of PSP-Richardson's syndrome (PSP-RS), 39 patients with PD and 29 age -and education -matched controls were administered Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), phonemic and semantic fluency tasks, Auditory Verbal Learning Test (AVLT), Visual Learning and Memory Test for Neuropsychological Assessment by Lamberti and Weidlich (Diagnosticum für Cerebralschädigung, DCS), Tower of Toronto (ToT) and two motor sequencing tasks. Patients with PSP-RS and PD were matched in terms of MMSE scores and mood. RESULTS: Performance on DCS was lower in PSP-RS than in PD. AVLT delayed recall was better in PSP-RS than PD. Motor sequencing task did not differentiate between patients. Scores on AVLT correlated positively with phonemic fluency scores in both PSP-RS and PD. ToT rule violation scores were negatively associated with DCS performance in PSP-RS and PD as well as with AVLT performance in PD. CONCLUSIONS: Global memory performance is relatively similar in PSP-RS and PD. Executive factors (initiation and inhibition) are closely related to memory performance in PSP-RS and PD. Visuospatial learning impairment in PSP-RS is possibly linked to impulsivity and failure to inhibit automatic responses.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".