Eye tracking identifies biomarkers in α-synucleinopathies versus progressive supranuclear palsy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This study (1) describes and compares saccade and pupil abnormalities in patients with manifest alpha-synucleinopathies (αSYN: Parkinson's disease (PD), Multiple System Atrophy (MSA)) and a tauopathy (progressive supranuclear palsy (PSP)); (2) determines whether patients with rapid-eye-movement sleep behaviour disorder (RBD), a prodromal stage of αSYN, already have abnormal responses that may indicate a risk for developing PD or MSA. METHODS: Ninety (46 RBD, 27 PD, 17 MSA) patients with an αSYN, 10 PSP patients, and 132 healthy age-matched controls (CTRL) were examined with a 10-min video-based eye-tracking task (Free Viewing). Participants were free to look anywhere on the screen while saccade and pupil behaviours were measured. RESULTS: amplitude) with smaller amplitude than CTRL. Saccade frequency was greater in RBD than in other patients. Following clip change, saccades were temporarily suppressed, then rebounded at a slower pace than CTRL in all patient groups. RBD had distinct, although discrete saccade abnormalities that were more marked in PD, MSA, and even more in PSP. The vertical saccade rate was reduced in all patients and decreased most in PSP. Clip changes produced large increases or decreases in screen luminance requiring pupil constriction or dilation, respectively. PSP elicited smaller pupil constriction/dilation responses than CTRL, while MSA elicited the opposite. CONCLUSION: RBD patients already have discrete but less pronounced saccade abnormalities than PD and MSA patients. Vertical gaze palsy and altered pupil control differentiate PSP from αSYN.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".