Cardiovascular/Stroke Risk Stratification in Parkinson’s Disease Patients Using Atherosclerosis Pathway and Artificial Intelligence Paradigm: A Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Parkinson’s disease (PD) is a severe, incurable, and costly condition leading to heart failure. The link between PD and cardiovascular disease (CVD) is not available, leading to controversies and poor prognosis. Artificial Intelligence (AI) has already shown promise for CVD/stroke risk stratification. However, due to a lack of sample size, comorbidity, insufficient validation, clinical examination, and a lack of big data configuration, there have been no well-explained bias-free AI investigations to establish the CVD/Stroke risk stratification in the PD framework. The study has two objectives: (i) to establish a solid link between PD and CVD/stroke; and (ii) to use the AI paradigm to examine a well-defined CVD/stroke risk stratification in the PD framework. The PRISMA search strategy selected 223 studies for CVD/stroke risk, of which 54 and 44 studies were related to the link between PD-CVD, and PD-stroke, respectively, 59 studies for joint PD-CVD-Stroke framework, and 66 studies were only for the early PD diagnosis without CVD/stroke link. Sequential biological links were used for establishing the hypothesis. For AI design, PD risk factors as covariates along with CVD/stroke as the gold standard were used for predicting the CVD/stroke risk. The most fundamental cause of CVD/stroke damage due to PD is cardiac autonomic dysfunction due to neurodegeneration that leads to heart failure and its edema, and this validated our hypothesis. Finally, we present the novel AI solutions for CVD/stroke risk prediction in the PD framework. The study also recommends strategies for removing the bias in AI for CVD/stroke risk prediction using the PD framework.
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 | 0.005 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".