1121 Nonmotor Symptoms Affect Sleep Quality in Early-Stage Parkinson’s Disease Patients With or Without Cognitive Dysfunction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Introduction Parkinson’s disease (PD) patients frequently present with sleep disorders. This study was designed to assess the impact of nonmotor symptoms (NMSs) on subjective sleep quality in early-stage PD patients with and without cognitive dysfunction. Methods A sample of 389 early-stage PD patients (Hoehn and Yahr score ≤2.5, duration ≤5 years) was recruited for the present study. The Non-Motor Symptoms Questionnaire (NMS-Quest) was used to screen for global NMSs. Depressive symptoms were assessed using the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAMD). PD motor symptoms were measured with the Unified PD Rating Scale (UPDRS), part III. The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) was used to evaluate global cognitive status, and the PD Sleep Scale (PDSS) was used to quantify sleep quality. Logistic regression models were built to identify factors associated with sleep disturbances. Results In our sample, approximately one-quarter of the PD patients suffered from sleep disturbances (23.7%). Our results also confirmed the high prevalence of cognitive dysfunction in patients with PD (39.8%). In total, the patients who suffered from NMSs, such as depressive symptoms, anxiety symptoms, urinary tract symptoms and hallucinations/delusions, had poorer sleep quality. Better cognition may protect against sleep disorders. In patients with cognitive dysfunction, the NMS-Hallucinations/delusions score was the most important risk factor for sleep disorders. In patients without cognitive dysfunction, NMSs such as anxiety and cognition and medication were related to sleep disorder. Conclusion NMSs in early-stage PD are highly associated with and are determinants of subjective sleep quality. Future studies should focus on elucidating the pathophysiology of these symptoms. Support Special Funds of the Jiangsu Provincial Key Research and Development Projects (grant No. BE2018610)
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".