Impaired serial ordering in nondemented patients with mild Parkinson’s disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The ability to arrange thoughts and actions in an appropriate serial order (the problem of serial order) is essential to complex behaviors such as language, reasoning and cognitive planning. Patients with Parkinson's disease (PD) perform poorly in tasks that rely on the successful rearrangement of working memory representations. We hypothesized that serial ordering is impaired in nondemented patients with mild PD. We recruited 49 patients with mild idiopathic PD (Hoehn and Yahr Scale 1-2.5) and 51 matched healthy adults. Nineteen patients had normal global cognition (PD-NC, Montreal Cognitive Assessment, MoCA≥26/30) and thirty patients had mild cognitive impairment (PD-MCI, 21≤MoCA≤25). All participants underwent three working memory assessments: two experimental tests that require reordering random digits following a particular rule (adaptive digit ordering test and digit span backward test) and a control test that requires maintaining but no reordering (digit span forward test). PD-NC and PD-MCI patients performed significantly worse (with lower test scores and larger ordering costs) than healthy controls in both digit ordering and backward tests, although they performed normally in the forward test. The ordering cost increased as a function of age across groups, indicating an aging-related decline in the ability of serial ordering. However, individual patients' task performances were not correlated with their severity or duration of motor symptoms, or daily exposure to dopaminergic drugs. These results suggested that serial ordering deficits exist in early stages of PD, prior to subtle changes in global cognition and in parallel with motor symptoms.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".