Neural substrates underlying distinct dual cognitive syndromes in Parkinson's disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A dual-syndrome hypothesis, which states the cognitive impairments in Parkinson's disease (PD) are attributable to frontostriatal dopaminergic dysregulation and cortical disturbance-each associated with attention/executive and memory/visuospatial dysfunction, respectively-has been widely accepted. This multisystem contribution also underlies highly heterogeneous progression rate to dementia. METHODS: I]FP-CIT) SPECT and neuropsychological examinations were enrolled. Patients who agreed to participate and age- and sex-matched healthy controls (HCs) also underwent 7-T MRI. Patients were classified as cognitively normal (PD-CN) or mild cognitive impairment (PD-MCI) following the level II criteria of Movement Disorder Society Guideline. RESULTS: I]FP-CIT uptake in PD was correlated with the performance of attention/working memory (trail-making test [TMT]-A and symbol digit modality test) and executive (TMT-B) domains. In contrast, the regional cortical thickness in the left frontotemporal and right frontal lobes in PD was correlated with performance of memory (Hopkins verbal learning test-revised delayed recall) and visuospatial (judgment of line orientation) domains. Moreover, compared to 37 HCs with a Montreal Cognitive Assessment score of >25, PD-CN patients showed broad occipitoparietal cortical thinning. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated distinctive impairments of dopaminergic frontostriatal deficits and cortical degeneration as neural bases for the dual-syndrome hypothesis. Our findings suggest that occipitoparietal lobe thinning occurs at a cognitively normal stage, and additional frontotemporal lobe thinning underlies impairments in the memory and visuospatial domains at the PD-MCI stage.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".