Differences in motor function and psychological factors across phenotypic patterns of freezing of gait in Parkinson’s disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To investigate the characteristic changes in motor function and psychological factors among Parkinson’s disease (PD) patients with different phenotypic patterns of freezing of gait (FOG), and to explore the trends in phenotypic heterogeneity of these features. Methods A cross-sectional study was conducted on 17 PD patients without FOG (PD-NFOG) and 25 PD patients with FOG (PD-FOG) [including 13 cases of trembling-in-place (TP) and 12 cases of shuffling-with-small-steps (SS)]. Another 28 demographically matched (age, gender, education level and others) healthy individuals were recruited from community and served as healthy controls (HC). Motor function was assessed using quantitative gait analysis and clinical scales, including the unified Parkinson’s disease rating scale part Ⅲ (UPDRS-Ⅲ) and H&Y staging. Psychological evaluations were carried out with Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS-A/HADS-D), Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7), Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), Snaith-Hamilton Pleasure Scale (SHAPS), Reading the Mind in the Eyes Test (RMET), Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), and digital symbol substitution test (DSST). Results ① There were significant differences between the PD-FOG and PD-NFOG groups in terms of motor parameters (stride width, length, height and cadence) and cognitive function (MoCA) score (P<0.05). The largest effect sizes were found for cognitive function scores of RMET [η²=0.716 (95%CI: 0.611~0.761), P<0.05], DSST [η²=0.667 (95%CI: 0.553~0.744), P<0.05], and MoCA [η²=0.597 (95%CI: 0.425~0.750), P<0.05], all of which were classified as medium effect sizes. ② Associative characteristics of motor and psychological factors in the PD-FOG group: H&Y stage was positively correlated with HADS-A [r=0.470 (95%CI: 0.080~0.735), P=0.018] and HADS-D [r=0.560 (95%CI: 0.199~0.787), P=0.004], while the total score of UPDRS-Ⅲ was negatively correlated with DSST [r=-0.574 (95%CI: -0.794~-0.219), P=0.003]. ③Subgroup analysis revealed significant differences (P<0.05) between the TP and SS patterns in motor parameters (stride length and cadence). Moderate effect sizes were observed for HADS-A [δ=0.752 (95%CI: -0.070~1.558), P=0.072], SHAPS [δ=0.512 (95%CI: -0.291~1.305), P=0.132] and HADS-D [δ=0.481 (95%CI: -0.321~1.273), P=0.253], with mean increase by 39.0%, 8.3%, and 24.5%, respectively, in the TP subgroups when compared to the SS subgroups. Conclusion PD-FOG patients exhibit characteristic changes in motor function and psychological factors. Cognitive impairment in PD patients may serve as a characteristic marker for FOG progression. Additionally, psychological features in PD-FOG patients with different motor phenotypes show trends of phenotypic heterogeneity.
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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".