Cognitive processes that indirectly affect olfactory dysfunction in Parkinson's disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Accurate early diagnosis of Parkinson's disease is hampered by its long prodromal period and the variable manifestations of its motor symptoms. While olfactory dysfunction can occur before motor-symptom onset and serve as a non-disease-specific diagnostic aid, its underlying causes are incompletely understood. METHODS: Correlation analyses, univariate density estimates, ANOVA and regression evaluated relationships between scores on the Montreal Cognitive Assessment and Hopkins Verbal Learning Test and those on the University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test in 1280 Parkinson's Progression Markers Initiative subjects placed into five diagnostic categories. Structural equation modeling identified cognitive measures having significant indirect effects on olfactory-function-test scores. RESULTS: < .033). CONCLUSION: Impaired verbal learning/memory and visuospatial/executive function contributes to lower performance on olfactory function tests in Parkinson's disease. As both of these domains impact decision-making, decision-making in turn may impact olfactory assessment in Parkinson's disease.
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 | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
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".