Insight into dopamine-dependent planning deficits in Parkinson's disease: A sharing of cognitive and sensory resources
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Attention and sensorimotor processes are needed for successful planning of footsteps during complex gait situations, but their response to dopaminergic treatment is poorly understood. In the current study, we evaluated walking and gaze behaviours while planning an approach toward an obstacle to be stepped over. The obstacle clearance task was completed both ON and OFF dopaminergic medication by individuals with Parkinson's disease (n=20) and compared to healthy age-matched control participants (n=19), as well as with and without an auditory digit monitoring dual task. Gait and gaze data were synchronized. Each trial was split into an early and late phase prior to the obstacle, providing a unique opportunity to examine dopamine-dependent planning deficits in Parkinson's disease. Interestingly, only patients in the OFF medication state showed greater deceleration in the late phase (i.e. just before the obstacle), as well as an increase in step time variability (also in this late phase) with the additional demands of a dual task. Although there were differences in gait between groups, gaze behaviors were the same for all participants irrespective to phase and dual-task condition. Surprisingly, the gaze behavior of the PD OFF group showed no interactions with phase or condition suggesting that the deceleration and increased variability when approaching an obstacle is the result of a greater demand for online sensory feedback that cannot be compensated for with visual strategies. We conclude that dopamine influences planning by limiting sensorimotor processing capacity, especially in the presence of increased cognitive demand in Parkinson's disease. Acknowledgments: CFI; CNPq
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 | 0.001 | 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".