Attention/Working Memory and Executive Function in Parkinson's Disease: Review, Critique, and Recommendations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".