Olfactory Impairment Correlates with Executive Functions Disorders and Other Specific Cognitive Dysfunctions in Parkinson’s Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Olfactory and cognitive disorders represent important non-motor symptoms in Parkinson's disease (PD). No clear evidence was reported about association of specific cognitive domains and olfactory impairment. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the association between olfactory dysfunction and specific cognitive domains in PD patients compared to controls. METHODS: 178 PD patients and 98 controls were enrolled and evaluated for odor threshold (OT), discrimination (OD), identification (OI), and TDI score using the Sniffin' Sticks test. Cognitive function was evaluated using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment scale with six sub-scores: Orientation (OIS), Attention (AIS), Language (LIS), Visuospatial (VIS), Memory (MIS), and Executive index scores (EIS). RESULTS: Statistically significant correlations were observed between OT versus, LIS, and between TDI score versus EIS. Multivariate linear regression analysis, including age and sex which are well-known predictors of olfactory dysfunction, showed that, among specific cognitive domains, only LIS was significant predictor for OT, VIS was a significant predictor for OD, while both EIS and AIS were significant predictors for OI, and finally only EIS was significant predictor for TDI score. CONCLUSIONS: Olfactory disorders in PD patients appear commonly related to dysfunction of specific cognitive domains, with strict association between global olfactory impairment and executive function deficits.
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".