Effects of Cognitive Performance and Affective Status on Fatigue in Parkinson’s Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<b><i>Background:</i></b> Fatigue is a common non-motor symptom in Parkinson’s disease (PD) and is typically assessed via self-reported questionnaires such as the Parkinson’s Fatigue Scale (PFS). The PFS captures the presence of subjective experience of physical fatigue as well as its impact on daily functioning. <b><i>Objectives:</i></b> We aimed to investigate whether different variables (cognition, neuropsychiatric symptoms, disease-related measures) are associated with the experience of physical fatigue in comparison to fatigue affecting daily functioning. <b><i>Method:</i></b> Sixty-two non-demented PD patients were evaluated through questionnaires assessing fatigue, daytime sleepiness, apathy, depression, anxiety, and cognition. Items of fatigue were classified and summarized into two index variables measuring either the subjective experience of physical fatigue or the impact of fatigue on daily functioning. Linear regression with a stepwise elimination procedure was conducted to select the significant predictors for each index variable separately. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Subjective experience of physical fatigue (Model 1; <i>r</i><sup>2</sup> = 0.46; <i>p &#x3c;</i>0.01) was significantly associated with higher levels of depression (<i>b =</i>0.07; <i>p &#x3c;</i>0.01), anxiety (<i>b =</i>0.03; <i>p &#x3c;</i>0.05), and lower performances in verbal episodic memory (<i>b =</i>–0.16; <i>p &#x3c;</i>0.05). Fatigue affecting daily functioning (Model 2; <i>r</i><sup>2</sup> = 0.44; <i>p &#x3c;</i>0.05) was significantly related to higher levels of depression (<i>b</i> = 0.07; <i>p</i> &#x3c; 0.01), anxiety (<i>b</i> = 0.03; <i>p</i> &#x3e; 0.05), and lower motor functioning (<i>b</i> = 0.01; <i>p</i> = 0.05). <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> In conclusion, our work supports associations between fatigue and other neuropsychiatric symptoms in PD and extends prior work suggesting that motor disturbances are specifically linked to fatigue-related impairment of daily functioning, but not to the subjective experience of physical fatigue.
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".