Clinically Informed Automated Assessment of Finger Tapping Videos in Parkinson’s Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The utilization of Artificial Intelligence (AI) for assessing motor performance in Parkinson's Disease (PD) offers substantial potential, particularly if the results can be integrated into clinical decision-making processes. However, the precise quantification of PD symptoms remains a persistent challenge. The current standard Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) and its variations serve as the primary clinical tools for evaluating motor symptoms in PD, but are time-intensive and prone to inter-rater variability. Recent work has applied data-driven machine learning techniques to analyze videos of PD patients performing motor tasks, such as finger tapping, a UPDRS task to assess bradykinesia. However, these methods often use abstract features that are not closely related to clinical experience. In this paper, we introduce a customized machine learning approach for the automated scoring of UPDRS bradykinesia using single-view RGB videos of finger tapping, based on the extraction of detailed features that rigorously conform to the established UPDRS guidelines. We applied the method to 75 videos from 50 PD patients collected in both a laboratory and a realistic clinic environment. The classification performance agreed well with expert assessors, and the features selected by the Decision Tree aligned with clinical knowledge. Our proposed framework was designed to remain relevant amid ongoing patient recruitment and technological progress. The proposed approach incorporates features that closely resonate with clinical reasoning and shows promise for clinical implementation in the foreseeable future.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".