Sudden-onset sleep in patients with Parkinson’s disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sudden-onset sleep (SOS) is one of the manifestations of excessive daytime sleepiness (ЕDS) in Parkinson’s disease (PD). Aim: сlarify the clinical and polysomnographic characteristics of patients with SOS at the expanded (2 and 3 stages according to Hoehn–Yahr) stages of PD. Material and methods. 42 patients (18 men and 24 women, average age 66.5 ± 7.9 years, duration of PD 8.9 ± 4.6 years, Hoehn–Yahr stage of PD 2.6 ± 0.5) who received combined dopaminergic therapy with levodopa and dopamine agonist were examined. 32 patients had ЕDS, 10 patients did not have it. The Unified Parkinson’s disease rating scale (UPDRS parts II, III in “on” state of dopaminergic medication), the diary of the assessment of the waking period, the Epworth Sleepiness Scale, the Parkinson Disease Sleep Scale I (PDSS I), the Sсales for Outcomes of Parkinsons disease-Cognition (SCOPA-Cog), the Beck Depression Inventory, the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory, the Apathy Scale, the Stroop test. Objective sleep-wake assessment: standard nocturnal video-polysomnography (PSG), multiple sleep latency test (MSLT). Results. SOS was detected in 69% of patients with complaints of ЕDS. Patients with SOS had a shorter latency of falling asleep according to MSLT data (8.1 ± 5.9 min versus 14.2 ± 3.9 min in patients without of ЕDS, p < 0.05).Patients with SOS had a high severity of motor function disorders, apathy and depression (p < 0.05). Рatients with SOS had no significant differences in the main PSG characteristics of night sleep. Conclusion. SOS can be considered as one of the manifestations of a more severe course of PD. A decrease in the effectiveness of night sleep and a change in its structure are not a determining factor in the development of SOS.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".