P1‐301: THE ASSOCIATION BETWEEN PERCEPTION OF COGNITIVE DECLINE AND MILD COGNITIVE IMPAIRMENT IN NON‐DEMENTED PATIENTS WITH PARKINSON'S DISEASE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) is common in patients with Parkinson's disease (PD). The self-report of cognitive decline could facilitate the diagnosis of MCI. However, the perception of a cognitive decline in patients with PD may be limited due to the presence of apathy which is also common in PD. This study is aimed to evaluate the association between self- and informant-perception of cognitive decline, and the objective cognitive decline in non-demented PD patients. 73 non-demented, non-depressed patients with PD were included from Parkinson clinic at Siriraj Hospital. Perception of cognitive decline was assessed by using the Cognitive Change Index (CCI), Thai-version. The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) Thai-version was used to assess the objective cognitive decline and to diagnose a mild cognitive impairment (PD-MCI) according to Movement Disorder Society guideline. Association of the diagnosis of PD-MCI, MoCA score and CCI scores obtained from subjects (CCI-S) and their informants (CCI-I) was analyzed. Apathy was diagnosed by the 2009 proposed diagnostic criteria for apathy in Alzheimer's disease and other neuropsychiatric disorders. There were 19 cognitively-normal PD patients (PD-CN) and 54 patients with PD-MCI. CCI-I score was significantly higher in the PD-MCI group as compared to PD-CN (37.7±14.8, 29.4±5.7, respectively, p=0.001), but not the CCI-S (p=0.59). However, both CCI-I and CCI-S scores were not correlated with MoCA score (p=0.82 and 0.36, respectively). 19 (35.2%) participants were diagnosed as having apathy, and all of them were in the PD-MCI group. No patients in the PD-CN group had apathy. Only the informant perception of cognitive decline, as measured by the CCI-I Thai-version, and the diagnosis of apathy are associated with the diagnosis of MCI in Thai patients with PD. Integration of a report of cognitive deficit from an informant and the diagnosis of apathy could help in the diagnosis of PD-MCI. More studies with comprehensive neuropsychiatric tests are needed to demonstrate the relationship between the perception of cognitive decline and objective cognitive performance.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".