White Matter Hyperintensities and Cognitive Decline in de Novo Parkinson’s Disease Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Objective White Matter Hyperintensities (WMHs) are associated with cognitive decline in normative aging and Alzheimer’s disease. However, the pathogenesis of cognitive decline in Parkinson’s disease (PD) is not directly related to vascular causes, and therefore the role of WMHs in PD remains unclear. If WMH has a higher impact on cognitive decline in PD, vascular pathology should be assessed and treated with a higher priority in this population. Here we investigate whether WMH leads to increased cognitive decline in PD, and if these effects relate to cortical thinning Methods To investigate the role of WMHs in PD, it is essential to study recently-diagnosed/non-treated patients. De novo PD patients and age-matched controls (N PD =365,N Control =174) with FLAIR/T2-weighted scans at baseline were selected from Parkinson’s Progression Markers Initiative (PPMI). WMHs and cortical thickness were measured to analyse the relationship between baseline WMHs and future cognitive decline (follow-up:4.09±1.14 years) and cortical thinning (follow-up:1.05±0.10 years). Results High WMH load (WMHL) at baseline in PD was associated with increased cognitive decline, significantly more than i) PDs with low WMHL and ii) controls with high WMHL. Furthermore, PD patients with higher baseline WMHL showed more cortical thinning in right frontal lobe than subjects with low WMHL. Cortical thinning of this region also predicted decline in performance on a cognitive test. Interpretation Presence of WMHs in de novo PD patients predicts greater future cognitive decline and cortical thinning than in normal aging. Recognizing WMHs as a potential predictor of cognitive deficit in PD provides an opportunity for timely interventions.
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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".