Beta-adrenoceptor drugs and progression to Parkinson’s disease milestones in a large pooled incident cohort
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Beta-adrenoceptor-blockers and agonists have been associated with an increased and decreased risk of Parkinson's disease (PD), respectively. We aimed to investigate whether these medications are linked to clinical heterogeneity and progression in PD. Longitudinal data from the Parkinson's Incident Cohorts Collaboration (n = 1107) were analysed. Baseline clinical status and progression to Hoehn & Yahr stage 3 (H&Y3) or dementia were compared in beta-blocker or beta-agonist users versus non-users of each drug. Baseline motor and cognitive variables were similar in beta-blocker users (n = 195) versus non-users and beta-agonist users (n = 68) versus non-users, following adjustment for relevant confounders. Beta-blocker users (n = 156) progressed faster to H&Y3 (p = 0.002), accounting for relevant confounders (Hazard Ratio (HR) = 1.538; p = 0.011), while beta-agonist users (n = 54) progressed similarly to non-users. Neither drug was associated with progression to dementia. These findings support the possibility that beta-adrenoceptor drugs may have potential in modifying aspects of PD progression. Further investigation is essential to identify any causative component in the relationship.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".