Impact of affective and cognitive impairments on quality of life in patients with early stages of Parkinson’s disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction . Affective and cognitive disorders are characteristic manifestations of Parkinson’s disease (PD). The clinical assessment of this disorder in PD is assessed as a negative assessment of the quality of life (QoL) of patients. Issues related to motor, affective, cognitive communities with various aspects of QoL at the stage of PD require mandatory. Aim : to evaluate the associations between motor, affective, cognitive impairments and QoL indicators in patients in the early stages of PD. Results . Significant relationships were found between the motor aspects of QOL and affective and cognitive impairments: between the total assessment of AFLD, assessments of mobility/everyday activity of QoL and SSOBP (r = 0.45–0.49, p < 0.05), depression (r = 0.77, p < 0.05), apathy (r = 0.42, p < 0.05), trait anxiety (TA, r = 0.58, p < 0.05), visuospatial functions SCOPA (r = –0,34, p < 0.05), Stroop test 3 (r = 0.33, p < 0.05).There was a relationship between self-assessment of emotional well-being of QoL and affective, cognitive impairments: depression, TA (r = 0.73, 0.77, p < 0.05), state anxiety (SA), apathy (r = 0.52, r = 0.56, p < 0.05); SCOPA (r = –0.27, p < 0.05), interference index, Stroop test (r = 0.29, p < 0.05), 1 part TMT test (r = 0.31, p < 0.05). A relationship was found between self-assessment of social life and motor, affective disorders: SSOS (r = 0.38, p < 0.05), SA (r = 0.43, p < 0.05), depression (r = 0.48, p < 0.05), apathy (r = 0.57, p < 0.05). Conclusion . The significant role of depression, anxiety, apathy, cognitive impairments in self-assessment of motor disorders, decreased daily activity, deterioration of emotional and social aspects of QoL already in the early stages of PD justifies the need for diagnosis and treatment of these disorders in each patient. Taking into account the mutual influence of motor, affective and cognitive disorders, complex rehabilitation is required to improve the quality of life of patients.
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) | 0.000 | 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".