Corticospinal Suppression Underlying Intact Movement Preparation Fades in Parkinson's Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In Parkinson's disease (PD), neurophysiological abnormalities within the primary motor cortex (M1) have been shown to contribute to bradykinesia, but exact modalities are still uncertain. We propose that such motor slowness could involve alterations in mechanisms underlying movement preparation, especially the suppression of corticospinal excitability-called "preparatory suppression"-which is considered to propel movement execution by increasing motor neural gain in healthy individuals. METHODS: On two consecutive days, 29 PD patients (on and off medication) and 29 matched healthy controls (HCs) underwent transcranial magnetic stimulation over M1, eliciting motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) in targeted hand muscles, while they were either at rest or preparing a left- or right-hand response in an instructed-delay choice reaction time task. Preparatory suppression was assessed by expressing MEP amplitudes during movement preparation relative to rest. RESULTS: Contrary to HCs, PD patients showed a lack of preparatory suppression when the side of the responding hand was analyzed, especially when the latter was the most affected one. This deficit, which did not depend on dopamine medication, increased with disease duration and also tended to correlate with motor impairment, as measured by the Movement Disorder Society Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale, Part III (both total and bradykinesia scores). CONCLUSIONS: Our novel findings indicate that preparatory suppression fades in PD, in parallel with worsening motor symptoms, including bradykinesia. Such results suggest that an alteration in this marker of intact movement preparation could indeed cause motor slowness and support its use in future studies on the relation between M1 alterations and motor impairment in PD. © 2022 International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".