MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392865218 · doi:10.3233/jpd-230411

Defining Parkinson’s Disease: Past and Future

2024· review· en· W4392865218 on OpenAlexaff
Kristína Kulcsárová, Matěj Škorvánek, Ronald B. Postuma, Daniela Berg

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Parkinson s Disease · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicParkinson's Disease Mechanisms and Treatments
Canadian institutionsMontreal Neurological Institute and Hospital
FundersVedecká Grantová Agentúra MŠVVaŠ SR a SAVAgentúra na Podporu Výskumu a Vývoja
KeywordsDiseaseNeurodegenerationParkinson's diseaseNeuroscienceMotor symptomsHuntington's diseaseMedicinePsychologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Parkinson's disease (PD) is the second most common still relentlessly progressive neurodegenerative disorder with a long period in which the pathophysiological process is already spreading but cardinal motor symptoms are not present. This review outlines the major developments and milestones in our understanding of PD that have shaped the way we define this disorder. Past criteria and definitions of PD have been based on clinical motor manifestations enabling diagnosis of the disease only in later symptomatic stages. Nevertheless, with advancing knowledge of disease pathophysiology and aim of early disease detection, a major shift of the diagnostic paradigm is being advocated towards a biological definition similar to other neurodegenerative disorders including Alzheimer's disease and Huntington's disease, with the ultimate goal of an earlier, disease course modifying therapy. We summarize the major pillars of this possible approach including in vivo detection of neuronal α-synuclein aggregation, neurodegeneration and genetics and outline their possible application in different contexts of use in the frame of biological PD definition.

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)0.002
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.299 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations47
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Parkinson s DiseaseSame topicParkinson's Disease Mechanisms and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207