MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410361881 · doi:10.3390/cells14100710

Exploring Risk and Protective Factors in Parkinson’s Disease

2025· review· en· W4410361881 on OpenAlexaff
Iman Beheshti

Bibliographic record

VenueCells · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicParkinson's Disease Mechanisms and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParkinson's diseaseDiseaseMedicineNeurosciencePhysical medicine and rehabilitationPsychologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Understanding the risk and protective factors associated with Parkinson's disease (PD) is crucial for improving outcomes for patients, individuals at risk, healthcare providers, and healthcare systems. Studying these factors not only enhances our knowledge of the disease but also aids in developing effective prevention, management, and treatment strategies. This paper reviews the key risk and protective factors associated with PD, with a particular focus on the biological mechanisms underlying these factors. Risk factors include genetic mutations, racial predispositions, and environmental exposures, all of which contribute to an increased likelihood of developing PD or accelerating its progression. Conversely, protective factors, such as regular physical exercise, adherence to a Mediterranean diet, and higher urate levels, have the potential to reduce inflammation and support mitochondrial function, thereby mitigating the risk of disease. However, identifying and validating these factors presents significant challenges. These challenges include the absence of reliable biomarkers, intricate interactions between genetic and environmental components, and clinical heterogeneity observed in patients with PD. These barriers complicate the establishment of clear causal relationships and hinder the development of targeted preventive strategies. To overcome these challenges, we propose several solutions and recommendations. Understanding the mechanisms underlying risk factors may inform future research aimed at developing standardized and more accurate biomarkers for PD, facilitating earlier diagnosis and improved monitoring of disease progression. Additionally, we offer actionable recommendations for PD prevention and management tailored to healthy individuals, patients diagnosed with PD, and healthcare systems. These strategies aim to improve clinical outcomes, enhance the quality of life, and optimize healthcare delivery for PD.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.972
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.088
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
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

Citations13
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCellsSame topicParkinson's Disease Mechanisms and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207