Comparison of cognitive characteristics in patients with early stage progressive supranuclear palsy and Parkinson’s disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To explore the differences of clinical and cognitive characteristics in patients with early progressive supranuclear palsy (PSP) and Parkinson’s disease (PD). Methods A total of 53 outpatients and inpatients whose Hoehn-Yahr (H&Y) stage was ≤3 were recruited (PSP 22, PD 31) from Guangdong General Hospital between January 2010 and February 2014. All participants underwent a detailed series of clinical investigations (such as H&Y Scale, Activity of Daily Living Scale) and cognitive assessments including Minimum Mental State Examination (MMSE), Montreal Cognitive Assessment（MoCA）, Wechsler Intelligence Scale and Wechsler Memory Scale neuropsychology tests. Then the differences of clinical and cognitive characteristics were analyzed in early PSP and PD groups. Results The scores of Activity of Daily Living Scale and H&Y Scale in PSP group were significantly higher than PD group (24.53±10.67 vs 16.57±3.97, 2.71±0.47 vs 1.92±1.01, t=-3.033，-3.874，both P<0.05). Global cognitive assessment: MMSE and MoCA scores of PSP patients were obviously lower than PD group (24.95±3.35 vs 27.55±2.08, 17.55±4.99 vs 23.29±4.50, t=-3.480，-4.374，both P<0.05). MoCA scores in visuospatial and executive function, naming, attention and orientation of PSP group were lower than PD group (1.91±1.67 vs 3.26±1.81, 2.36±0.79 vs 2.81±0.48, 4.27±1.24 vs 5.39±0.84, 4.73±1.32 vs 5.58±0.72, Z=-2.769，-2.399，-3.654，-2.504，all P<0.05). These PSP patients also scored less than PD patients on similarities, graphic arrangement, the block design test and digit span (6.45±2.89 vs 9.97±3.53, 5.86±2.03 vs 9.42±2.09, 4.91±1.97 vs 8.23±2.81, 6.50± 2.30 vs 9.42±2.09, Z=-3.488，-3.885，-4.138，-2.180，all P<0.05). Conclusions The ability of daily life and stage of illness in early PSP patients are worse than PD patients. The cognitive impairments are more serious in PSP group than PD group, mainly in the aspects of visuospatial, attention and executive function. Key words: Supranuclear palsy, progressive; Parkinson disease; Cognition disorders; Activities of daily living; Severity of illness index
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".