Preclinical Modeling of Treatment-induced Impulsivity in Parkinson's Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dopamine agonist therapy and deep brain stimulation (DBS) are both linked to increased impulsivity in Parkinson’s disease (PD), but the underlying mechanisms remain unclear. We trained intact and PD-like rats on a rat gambling task (rGT) measuring impulsive choice and \npremature responding. Animals were then retested with/without treatment, pramipexole (PPX) or DBS, administered chronically prior to rGT testing. Early PD-like rats did not exhibit major differences in rGT performance or treatment response. Our work suggests that DBS and PPX are not intrinsically linked with increases in impulsivity. Neither DBS nor PPX disrupted gambling-like behaviour in our paradigm, while differential effects on premature and perseverant responding in the task were observed with treatment. Based on our findings, the previously reported ability of PPX to increase impulsive choice might not be mediated by the dopamine D3 receptor. Interestingly, our work suggests that the effects of STN-DBS on impulse control might be amplitude-dependent.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".