Patient-specific models link neurotransmitter receptor mechanisms with motor and visuospatial axes of Parkinson’s disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Parkinson's disease involves multiple neurotransmitter systems beyond the classical dopaminergic circuit, but their influence on structural and functional alterations is not well understood. Here, we use patient-specific causal brain modeling to identify latent neurotransmitter receptor-mediated mechanisms contributing to Parkinson's disease progression. Combining the spatial distribution of 15 receptors from post-mortem autoradiography with 6 neuroimaging-derived pathological factors, we detect a diverse set of receptors influencing gray matter atrophy, functional activity dysregulation, microstructural degeneration, and dendrite and dopaminergic transporter loss. Inter-individual variability in receptor mechanisms correlates with symptom severity along two distinct axes, representing motor and psychomotor symptoms with large GABAergic and glutamatergic contributions, and cholinergically-dominant visuospatial, psychiatric and memory dysfunction. Our work demonstrates that receptor architecture helps explain multi-factorial brain re-organization, and suggests that distinct, co-existing receptor-mediated processes underlie Parkinson's disease.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".