Subjective Cognitive Complaints and Objective Cognitive Impairment in Parkinson's Disease
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Subjective cognitive complaints (SCCs) are very common in patients with Parkinson's disease (PD). However, the relationship between SCCs and objective cognitive impairment is still unclear. This study aimed to determine whether SCCs are correlated with objective cognitive performance in patients with PD. METHODS: Totals of 148 cognitively normal patients, 71 patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI), and 31 demented patients were recruited consecutively from a movement-disorders clinic. Their SCCs and cognitive performances were evaluated using the Cognitive Complaints Interview (CCI) and a comprehensive neuropsychological battery. RESULTS: The CCI score increased with age, duration of PD, and depression score, and was inversely correlated with cognitive performance. The association between CCI score and performance remained significant after adjustment for the depression score, age, and duration of PD. The CCI score could be used to discriminate patients with dementia from cognitively normal and MCI patients [area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC) of 0.80], but not patients with MCI or dementia from cognitively normal patients (AUC of 0.67). CONCLUSIONS: SCCs as measured by the CCI are strongly correlated with objective cognitive performance in patients with PD. The CCI can also be used to screen for dementia in patients with PD.
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.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 it