EEG Frequency Correlates with α2-Receptor Density in Parkinson’s Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Increased theta and delta power and decreased alpha and beta power, measured with quantitative electroencephalography (EEG), have been demonstrated to have utility for predicting the development of dementia in patients with Parkinson’s disease (PD). Noradrenaline modulates cortical activity and optimizes cognitive processes. We claim that the loss of noradrenaline may explain cognitive impairment and the pathological slowing of EEG waves. Here, we test the relationship between the number of noradrenergic α2 adrenoceptors and changes in the spectral EEG ratio in patients with PD. Methods: We included nineteen patients with PD and thirteen healthy control (HC) subjects in the study. We used positron emission tomography (PET) with [11C]yohimbine to quantify α2 adrenoceptor density. We used EEG power in the delta (δ, 1.5–3.9 Hz), theta (θ, 4–7.9 Hz), alpha (α, 8–12.9 Hz) and beta (β, 13–30 Hz) bands in regression analyses to test the relationships between α2 adrenoceptor density and EEG band power. Results: PD patients had higher power in the theta and delta bands compared to the HC volunteers. Patients’ theta band power was inversely correlated with α2 adrenoceptor density in the frontal cortex. In the HC subjects, age was correlated with, and occipital background rhythm frequency (BRF) was inversely correlated with, α2 adrenoceptor density in the frontal cortex, while occipital BRF was inversely correlated with α2 adrenoceptor density in the thalamus. Conclusions: The findings support the claim that the loss or dysfunction of noradrenergic neurotransmission may relate to the parallel processes of cognitive decline and EEG slowing.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".