A Multi‐sequence <scp>MRI</scp> Study in Parkinson's Disease: Association Between Rigidity and Myelin
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The pathophysiology of rigidity in Parkinson's disease (PD) is poorly understood. Multi-sequence functional and structural brain MRI may further clarify the origin of this clinical characteristic. PURPOSE: To examine both joint and unique relationships of MRI-based functional and structural imaging modalities to rigidity and other clinical features of PD. STUDY TYPE: Retrospective cross-sectional study. POPULATION: 31 PD subjects (aged 68.0 ± 5.9 years, 21 males) with average disease duration 9.3 ± 5.4 years. FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE: Multi-echo GRASE, diffusion-weighted echo planar imaging (EPI), and blood oxygen level dependent contrast EPI T2*-weighted sequences on a 3T scanner. ASSESSMENT: Myelin water fraction (MWF) and fractional anisotropy (FA) of 20 white-matter regions of interest (ROIs), and functional connectivity derived from resting-state fMRI among 56 ROIs were assessed. The Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale-Part III, Montreal Cognitive Assessment, Beck Depression Index, and Apathy Rating Scales were used to assess motor and non-motor symptoms. STATISTICAL TESTS: Multiset canonical correlation analysis (MCCA) and canonical correlation analysis (CCA) were utilized to examine the joint and unique relationships of multiple imaging measures with clinical symptoms of PD. A permutation test was used to determine statistical significance (P < 0.05). RESULTS: MCCA revealed a single significant component jointly linking MWF, FA, and functional connectivity to age, bradykinesia, and leg agility, non-motor symptoms of cognition, depression, and apathy, but not rigidity (P = 0.77), tremor (P = 0.50 and 0.67 on the left and right side), or sex (P = 0.54). After controlling for this joint component, CCA found a unique significant association between MWF and rigidity, but no other associations were detected, including with FA (P = 0.87). DATA CONCLUSION: MWF, FA, and functional connectivity can serve as multi-sequence imaging markers to characterize many PD symptoms. However, rigidity in PD is additionally associated with widespread myelin changes. EVIDENCE LEVEL: 4 TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 3.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".