Habitual exercisers versus sedentary subjects with Parkinson's Disease: Multimodal PET and fMRI study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The benefits of exercise in PD have been linked to enhanced dopamine (DA) transmission in the striatum. OBJECTIVE: To examine differences in DA release, reward signaling, and clinical features between habitual exercisers and sedentary subjects with PD. METHODS: C]raclopride PET scans before and after stationary cycling to determine exercise-induced release of endogenous DA in the dorsal striatum. Additionally, functional MRI assessed ventral striatum activation during reward anticipation. All participants completed motor (UPDRS III; finger tapping; and timed-up-and-go) and nonmotor (Beck Depression Inventory; Starkstein Apathy Scale) assessments. RESULTS: C]Raclopride analysis before and after stationary cycling demonstrated greater DA release in the caudate nuclei of habitual exercisers compared to sedentary subjects (P < 0.05). Habitual exercisers revealed greater activation of ventral striatum during the functional MRI reward task (P < 0.05) and lower apathy (P < 0.05) and bradykinesia (P < 0.05) scores versus sedentary subjects. CONCLUSIONS: Habitual exercise is associated with preservation of motor and nonmotor function, possibly mediated by increased DA release. This study formulates a foundation for prospective, randomized controlled studies. © 2018 International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".