MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390615836 · doi:10.3389/fnagi.2023.1296323

Retrograde procedural memory is impaired in people with Parkinson’s disease with freezing of gait

2024· article· en· W4390615836 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Laure Pauly, Claire Pauly, Maxime Hansen, Valerie E. Schröder, Armin Rauschenberger, Anja Leist, Rejko Krüger

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Aging Neuroscience · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicBalance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFonds National de la Recherche LuxembourgWellcome Trust
KeywordsPsychologyCognitionGaitPsychomotor learningDepression (economics)Cognitive flexibilityMontreal Cognitive AssessmentParkinson's diseaseEffects of sleep deprivation on cognitive performancePhysical medicine and rehabilitationCognitive declineAudiologyMedicineDiseaseDementiaPsychiatryCognitive impairmentInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Freezing of gait (FOG), is associated with impairment of different cognitive functions. Previous studies hypothesized that FOG may be due to a loss of automaticity. Research question To explore whether FOG is associated with impairment in cognitive functions, focusing on retrograde procedural memory, the memory responsible for the automatic, implicit stored procedures that have been acquired in earlier life stages. Methods In this cross-sectional, case–control study, 288 people with typical Parkinson’s disease (PD) from the Luxembourg Parkinson’s Study were assigned to Freezers (FOG+) and non-Freezers (FOG−) based on the MDS-UPDRS 2.13 (self-reported FOG episodes) and 3.11 (FOG evaluated by clinicians during gait assessment). Both groups were matched on age, sex and disease duration. Global cognition (MoCA), retrograde procedural memory and visuo-constructive abilities (CUPRO), psychomotor speed and mental flexibility (TMT) were assessed. Furthermore, we repeated our analyses by additionally controlling for depression (BDI-I). Results Besides lower global cognition (MoCA; p = 0.007) and mental flexibility (TMT-B and Delta-TMT; p < 0.001), FOG+ showed a lower performance in retrograde procedural memory (CUPRO-IS1; p < 0.001) compared to FOG−. After controlling additionally for depression, our main outcome variable CUPRO-IS1 remained significantly lower in FOG+ (p = 0.010). Conclusion Our findings demonstrated that besides lower global cognition and mental flexibility scores, FOG+ showed lower performance in retrograde procedural memory compared to matched FOG-control patients, even when accounting for factors such as age, sex, disease duration or depression. Significance In the context of limited treatment options, especially for non-invasive therapeutic approaches, these insights on procedural memory and FOG may lead to new hypotheses on FOG etiology and consequently the development of new treatment options.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.282 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Aging NeuroscienceSame topicBalance, Gait, and Falls PreventionFrench-language works237,207