Reading Alterations in Parkinson's Disease Indicate Worse Cognitive Status
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Reading difficulties are commonly reported in Parkinson's disease (PD). So far, only a few studies have assessed reading in PD, most of them confirming a different pattern in patients compared with healthy populations. Impaired oculomotor control is an early feature of PD. Cognitive deficits, on the other hand, may appear early, but they are most prominent at later stages. Although these two factors are thought to be responsible for the alterations in reading performance, it is unclear how each factor contributes to them. Objectives: To evaluate eye movements during reading in PD and healthy controls (HCs). Methods: Data from 42 HCs (36% men) and 48 patients with PD (67% men) at Hoehn and Yahr stages ≤3 were analyzed. PD participants were further divided into 2 groups based on their Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) score using a cutoff of ≥26. Eye movements were recorded with Tobii Pro Spectrum, a screen-based eye tracker with a sampling rate of 1200 Hz. Results: = 0.033) than HC, and further analysis showed that only patients with a lower MoCA score performed worse than HCs. Reading parameters were weakly associated with MoCA scores, irrespective of age and education. Conclusion: Changes in the reading pattern of PD patients are probably attributed to cognitive rather than pure oculomotor alterations.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.034 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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 it