Relationship Between Respiratory Sensory Perception, Speech, and Swallow in Parkinson's Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Background It has been suggested that sensory impairments contribute significantly to the motor deficits secondary to impaired sensorimotor integration in Parkinson's disease. Speech and swallowing are likely to become disordered in PD, and there is evidence that impaired upper airway sensation also contributes to these disorders. Objectives The goal of this study was to investigate the relationship between perception of general respiratory sensation, speech, and swallowing in PD. Methods Thirteen people with PD and 14 age‐equivalent controls volunteered to participate. Randomized blocks of inspiratory resistive loads were delivered, and participants gauged the magnitude of the loads using a modified Borg scale. The magnitude estimates were then compared to results of speech and swallowing evaluations using multivariate analysis of variance and a stepwise linear regression model. Results There was a significant overall interaction between the participant group (PD versus control) and respiratory load (F [10, 300] = 2.138; P = .022). A significant regression equation containing a predictor speech variable respiratory rating was found (F [1,22] = 6.946), P = .023), with a moderate effect size of R2 = .387. Conclusions People with PD have blunted perception of respiratory resistive loads when compared with age‐equivalent healthy adults. Results also suggest that blunted ME of resistive loads could contribute to changes in respiratory drive for speech (i.e., loudness).
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".