Predictors of Cognitive Change in Parkinson Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Mild cognitive impairment is common in Parkinson disease (PD-MCI). However, instability in this clinical diagnosis and variability in rates of progression to dementia raises questions regarding its utility for longitudinal tracking and prediction of cognitive change in PD. We examined baseline neuropsychological test and cognitive diagnosis predictors of cognitive change in PD. METHODS: Persons with PD, without dementia PD (N=138) underwent comprehensive neuropsychological assessment at baseline and were followed up to 2 years. Level II Movement Disorder Society criteria for PD-MCI and PD dementia (PDD) were applied annually. Composite global and domain cognitive z -scores were calculated based on a 10-test neuropsychological battery. RESULTS: Baseline diagnosis of PD-MCI was not associated with a change in global cognitive z -scores. Lower baseline attention and higher executive domain z -scores were associated with greater global cognitive z -score worsening regardless of cognitive diagnosis. Worse baseline domain z -scores in the attention and language domains were associated with progression to MCI or PDD, whereas higher baseline scores in all cognitive domains except executive function were associated with clinical and psychometric reversion to "normal" cognition. CONCLUSIONS: Lower scores on cognitive tests of attention were predictive of worse global cognition over 2 years of follow-up in PD, and lower baseline attention and language scores were associated with progression to MCI or PDD. However, PD-MCI diagnosis per se was not predictive of cognitive decline over 2 years. The association between higher executive domain z -scores and greater global cognitive worsening is probably a spurious result.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".