Study on related risk factors of pain in de novo Parkinson's disease patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To explore the risk factors of pain in de novo Parkinson's disease (PD) patients. Methods A total of 129 de novo PD patients collected from The Affiliated Brain Hospital of Nanjing Medical University from October 2018 to September 2021 were included. According to the Item ⁃17 of the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale Ⅱ (UPDRSⅡ⁃17th), patients were classified as PD patients without pain (UPDRSⅡ⁃17th was 0, n = 88) and PD patients with pain (UPDRSⅡ⁃17th ≥ 2, n = 41）. Mini⁃ Mental State Examination (MMSE) and corrected Montreal Cognitive Assessment (corrected MoCA) were used to assess cognitive function. Meanwhile, Hamilton Depression Rating Scale ⁃24 Items (HAMD ⁃24) was used to assess the depression status and the UPDRSⅢ was used to assess the motor function. The modified version of Hoehn ⁃Yahr staging was used to assess disease severity. The related risk factors of pain in PD patients were analyzed by univariate and multivariate forward Logistic regression. Results The in of pain in PD patients was 31.78% (41/129). Compared with PD without pain group, PD with pain group had lower scores in MMSE (Z = ﹣2.389, P = 0.017) and corrected MoCA (Z = ﹣2.166, P = 0.030), but higher scores in HAMD-24 (Z = ﹣4.024, P = 0.000), UPDRS Ⅲ (Z = ﹣3.639, P = 0.000）and Hoehn-Yahr staging grading (Z = ﹣2.232, P = 0.026). Further analysis of the differences between 2 groups in 7 domains of HAMD-24 showed PD with pain group had higher scores of the anxiety/somatization (Z = ﹣3.707, P = 0.000), mental disorder (Z = ﹣2.519, P = 0.012), retardation symptom (Z = ﹣2.048, P = 0.041), sleep disturbances (Z = ﹣3.484, P = 0.000) and despair symptom (Z = ﹣3.069, P = 0.002) than PD without pain group. Logistic regression analysis showed long duration (OR = 1.354, 95%CI: 1.013-1.809; P = 0.041), high HAMD-24 score (OR = 1.095, 95%CI: 1.033-1.162; P = 0.002) and high UPDRS Ⅲ score (OR = 1.040, 95%CI: 1.001- 1.082; P = 0.046) were risk factors of pain in PD patients. Conclusions Pain in PD has a high incidence in de novo PD patients. Long duration, a depressed state and severe motor symptoms are main risk factors for the development of pain in PD patients.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".