Deglutition Impairment during Dual Task in Parkinson Disease Is Associated with Cognitive Status
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Introduction Dysphagia is a relevant symptom in Parkinson disease (PD), and its pathophysiology is poorly understood. To date, researchers have not investigated the effects of combined motor tasks on swallowing. Such an assessment is of particular interest in PD, in which patients have specific difficulties while performing two movements simultaneously. Objective The present study tested the hypothesis that performing concurrent tasks could decrease the safety of swallowing in PD patients as visualized using fiberoptic endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (FEES). Methods A total of 19 patients and 19 controls matched by age, gender, and level of schooling were compared by FEES under two conditions: isolated swallowing and dual task (swallowing during non-sequential opposition of the thumb against the other fingers). The two tasks involved volumes of food of 3 mL and 5 mL. The PD subjects were classified according to the Hoehn & Yahr (H&Y) Scale, the Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE), and the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA). The FEES assessment was performed according to the Boston Residue and Clearance Scale (BRACS). Results The data showed a significant worsening of swallowing in the dual task assessment for both volumes (3 mL: p ≤ 0.001; 5 mL: p ≤ 0.001) in the PD group. A correlation between the MoCA and dual-task swallowing of 3 mL was also found. Conclusion These findings suggest that additional tasks involving manual motor movements result in swallowing impairment in patients with PD. Moreover, these data highlight the need to further evaluate such conditions during treatment and assessment of PD patients.
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".