Frontostriatal and limbic contributions to cognitive decline in Parkinson's disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The circuitry underlying heterogenous cognitive profiles in Parkinson's disease (PD) remains unclear. The purpose of this study is to investigate whether structural changes in frontostriatal and limbic pathways contribute to different cognitive trajectories in PD. METHODS: We obtained clinical and multimodal MRI data from 120 control and 122 PD subjects without dementia or severe motor disability. T1/T2-weighted images estimated volume, and diffusion imaging evaluated fractional anisotropy (FA) of frontostriatal (striatum and frontostriatal white matter [FSWM]) and limbic (hippocampus and fornix) structures. Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) gauged total and domain-specific (attention/executive and memory) cognitive function. Linear mixed-effects models were used to compare MRI and cognitive progression over 4.5 years between controls and PD and evaluate associations between baseline MRI and cognitive changes in PD. RESULTS: At baseline, control and PD groups were comparable, except PD participants had smaller striatal volume (p < 0.001). Longitudinally, PD showed faster decline in hippocampal volume, FSWM FA, and fornix FA (ps < .016), but not striatal volume (p = .218). Total and domain-specific MoCA scores declined faster in PD (ps < .030). In PD, lower baseline hippocampal volume (p = .005) and fornix FA (p = .032), but not striatal volume (p = .662) or FSWM FA (p = .143), were associated with faster total MoCA decline. Baseline frontostriatal metrics of striatal volume and FSWM FA were associated with faster attention/executive decline (p < .038), whereas lower baseline hippocampal volume was associated with faster memory decline (p = .005). CONCLUSION: In PD, frontostriatal structural metrics are associated with attention/executive tasks, whereas limbic changes correlated with faster global cognitive decline, particularly in memory tasks.
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".