Severity of <scp>REM</scp> sleep without atonia correlates with measures of cognitive impairment and depressive symptoms in <scp>REM</scp> sleep behaviour disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed to correlate REM sleep without atonia (RSWA) and neuropsychological data in patients with idiopathic/isolated REM sleep behaviour disorder (iRBD) and those with RBD associated with Parkinson's disease (PDRBD), in order to assess whether higher degrees of RSWA are related to poorer cognitive performance. A total of 142 subjects were enrolled: 48 with iRBD, 55 with PDRBD, and 39 PD without RBD (PDnoRBD). All participants underwent video-polysomnographic recording, clinical and neuropsychological assessment. RSWA was quantified according to two manual scoring methods (Montréal, SINBAR) and one automated (REM atonia index, RAI). Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) was diagnosed according to diagnostic criteria for MCI in Parkinson's disease. The relationship between neuropsychological scores and RSWA metrics was explored by multiple linear regression analysis and logistic regression models. Patients with iRBD showed significantly lower visuospatial functions and working memory, compared with the others. More severe RSWA was associated with a higher risk of reduced visuospatial abilities (OR 0.15), working memory (OR 2.48), attention (OR 2.53), and semantic fluency (OR 0.15) in the iRBD. In the whole group, a greater RSWA was associated with an increased risk for depressive symptoms (OR 3.6). A total of 57(40%) MCI subjects were found (17 iRBD, 26 PDRBD, and 14 PDnoRBD). Preserved REM-atonia was associated with a reduced odds of multi-domain MCI in the whole study population (OR 0.54). In conclusion, a greater severity of RSWA was associated with an increased risk for poor cognitive performance and depressive mood in patients with RBD. Moreover, higher RAI was associated with a lower risk of multi-domain MCI.
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 | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| 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".