Remote Monitoring of Treatment Response in Parkinson's Disease: The Habit of Typing on a Computer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The recent advances in technology are opening a new opportunity to remotely evaluate motor features in people with Parkinson's disease (PD). We hypothesized that typing on an electronic device, a habitual behavior facilitated by the nigrostriatal dopaminergic pathway, could allow for objectively and nonobtrusively monitoring parkinsonian features and response to medication in an at-home setting. METHODS: We enrolled 31 participants recently diagnosed with PD who were due to start dopaminergic treatment and 30 age-matched controls. We remotely monitored their typing pattern during a 6-month (24 weeks) follow-up period before and while dopaminergic medications were being titrated. The typing data were used to develop a novel algorithm based on recursive neural networks and detect participants' responses to medication. The latter were defined by the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale-III (UPDRS-III) minimal clinically important difference. Furthermore, we tested the accuracy of the algorithm to predict the final response to medication as early as 21 weeks prior to the final 6-month clinical outcome. RESULTS: The score on the novel algorithm based on recursive neural networks had an overall moderate kappa agreement and fair area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve with the time-coincident UPDRS-III minimal clinically important difference. The participants classified as responders at the final visit (based on the UPDRS-III minimal clinically important difference) had higher scores on the novel algorithm based on recursive neural networks when compared with the participants with stable UPDRS-III, from the third week of the study onward. CONCLUSIONS: This preliminary study suggests that remotely gathered unsupervised typing data allows for the accurate detection and prediction of drug response in PD. © 2019 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 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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".