MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412493340 · doi:10.1002/mds.30293

Attention/Working Memory and Executive Function in Parkinson's Disease: Review, Critique, and Recommendations

2025· review· en· W4412493340 on OpenAlexaff
Roberta Biundo, Ondřej Bezdíček, Davide Maria Cammisuli, Brenna Cholerton, John C. Dalrymple‐Alford, Nicola M.J. Edelstyn, Eleonora Fiorenzato, Erin Holker, Saül Martínez‐Horta, Alice Martini, Gabriella Santangelo, Bàrbara Segura, Chiara Siri, Alexander I. Tröster, Tiago Mestre, Álvaro Sánchez‐Ferro, Michelle Hyczy de Siqueira Tosin, Matěj Škorvánek, Daniel Weintraub, Gert J. Geurtsen

Bibliographic record

VenueMovement Disorders · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicParkinson's Disease Mechanisms and Treatments
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExecutive functionsStroop effectMemory spanPsychologyWorking memoryVerbal fluency testCognitionNeuropsychological assessmentExecutive dysfunctionCognitive testNeuropsychologyNeuropsychological testTrail Making TestPhysical medicine and rehabilitationDementiaClinical psychologyPhysical therapyPsychiatryMedicineDiseasePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Cognitive impairment in Parkinson's disease (PD) is a well-established non-motor complication that significantly affects the quality of life and well-being of both patients and care partners. To optimally detect mild cognitive impairment or dementia, extensive neuropsychological assessment is essential. A wide range of cognitive tests and clinical outcome assessments have been used in clinical settings, often without regard to their clinimetric quality. METHODS: We performed a literature review of tests assessing attention/working memory and executive domains in PD (tests on other domains are included in an accompanying review). The selected tests were evaluated for their clinimetric properties and categorized by a panel of experts as "recommended," "recommended with caveats," "suggested," or "listed" according to the International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society Clinical Outcome Assessment Scientific Evaluation Committee guidelines. RESULTS: A total of 30 tests were reviewed. Eight tests were "recommended," including four tests assessing attention/working memory abilities (WAIS-IV Digit Span, Coding and Symbol Search subtests, and Trail Making Test) and four tests assessing executive abilities (WAIS-IV Similarities, Wisconsin Card Sorting Test, Fluency Tests, and Stroop Color-Word Test). These tests demonstrated good to excellent levels of reliability and validity, have normative datasets, and are sensitive to change. Eight other tests were "recommended with caveats", eleven were "suggested," and three were "listed." CONCLUSIONS: The recommended tests for attention/working memory and executive functioning in PD can guide PD cognitive assessment. Other tests were identified as potentially useful; however, caution is advised due to their clinimetric limitations. Further validation studies are required for these tests. © 2025 The Author(s). Movement Disorders published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.043
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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.076

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.043
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.005
Bibliometrics0.0100.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0050.002
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.308 · 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

Citations13
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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