Lower-limb express visuomotor responses are spared in Parkinson’s Disease during step initiation from a stable position
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract While motor impairments have been extensively studied in Parkinson’s Disease, rapid visuomotor transformations for flexible interaction with the environment have received surprisingly little attention. In recent years, such rapid visuomotor transformations have been studied in the form of express visuomotor responses (EVRs), which are goal-directed bursts of muscle activity that are thought to originate from superior colliculus, reaching the periphery via the tecto-reticulospinal pathway. Here, we examined EVRs in the lower limbs during goal-directed step initiation in 20 people with Parkison’s Disease (PwPD) and 20 age-matched healthy control participants (HC). As lower-limb EVRs in the young have been shown to interact with postural control - which is often affected in PwPD – we manipulated the postural demands by varying initial stance width and target location. In the low postural demand condition, EVRs were robustly present in both the PwPD (17/20) and HC (16/20) group. However, when postural demands were high, EVRs were largely absent in both groups and, instead, strong anticipatory postural adjustments (APAs) were required prior to foot off. EVR magnitudes were, on average, stronger in PwPD compared to HC, but they decreased with increasing disease severity, suggesting that the EVR network may become compromised or down-regulated in later stages of the disease. While APA magnitudes were smaller in PwPD compared to HC, subsequent stepping performance (step reaction time, duration, size, velocity) was remarkably similar between the two groups. We suggest that the EVR network may be upregulated in the early stages of Parkinson’s disease in order to compensate for some of the emerging motor deficits experienced in daily life.
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) | 0.002 | 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".