Finger tapping and paratonia assessment in older adults with and without Mild cognitive impairment, motor-cognitive correlations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dementia syndromes involve cognitive but also early motor impairment. Finger tapping is a widely used motor assessment tool and Quantitative parameters may provide insights into the motor-cognitive association. Paratonia is another, frequently observed motor manifestation of dementia. A total of 104 participants underwent motor assessments, including the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS), quantitative finger tapping, and paratonia scales. Cognitive function was assessed using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE). Cognitively Impaired participants exhibited a prolonged strike duration compared to healthy participants. Executive function (EF), correlated with tapping parameters, suggesting shared neural mechanisms. Interestingly, participants with worse memory performance demonstrated greater temporal regularity. Paratonia was prevalent among participants and correlated with age and EF, reinforcing its association with frontal dysfunction. Significant differences were also revealed in motor-cognitive correlations between the two genders. This study provides important information about motor deficits in older adults, highlighting their associations with cognitive decline as well as the influence of gender and age on them. Quantitative assessment of finger tapping also proves to be an objective recorder of motor parameters linked to cognitive impairment. Future longitudinal studies are needed to evaluate the predictive value of these motor parameters in dementia progression.
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) | 0.000 | 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".