MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7066415762

THE INFLUENCE OF EXECUTIVE FUNCTION ON MOVEMENT FUNCTION IN PEOPLE WITH PARKINSON’S DISEASE AND UNIMPAIRED ADULTS

2023· article· en· W7066415762 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueTopSCHOLAR (Western Kentucky University) · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicEnzyme Production and Characterization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCognitionAssociation (psychology)Balance (ability)Motor functionAffect (linguistics)Task (project management)Trail Making TestGaitFunction (biology)Disease
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

C. Garbuz, I. DeSzily, L. Wehrman, M. Edwards, C. Wutzke Gonzaga University, Spokane, WA (Award Winner) People with Parkinson’s disease (PD) often experience impaired motor (i.e. balance) function that limits community engagement. Commonly, assessment of motor function includes only forward movement, despite difficulty changing directions and lateral stability. Additionally, non-motor impairment including executive function (i.e. memory, concentration) is associated with PD. Impaired executive function is exacerbated when completing dynamic balance tasks such as walking in people with PD. Improved understanding of the association between motor and non-motor function is important for maintaining quality of life for people with PD. PURPOSE: To determine the influence of executive function on movement function during a novel movement task in people with PD and unimpaired adults. METHODS: Unimpaired young adults (YA), unimpaired older adults (OA) and people with PD completed non-motor tests including the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and Trail Making test. Participants also completed a novel walking task (Walking Trail Making Test, WTMT) that included 12 floor targets arranged to replicate the Trail Making Test. Participants started at target 1 then navigated to target 2, tapping on each target with their foot to activate the next target. MoCA score and time to complete TMT were recorded as well as time to complete the WTMT and average velocity between targets. Data analysis was conducted using one-way ANOVA to identify differences between groups with an alpha value p< 0.05. Correlational analysis was conducted to determine associations between motor and non-motor tasks. RESULTS: Time to complete the WTMT differed between groups (YA:34.8 ± 5.73sec, PD:43.2 ± 11.1sec, OA:48.5 ± 9.93sec; p=0.024). A negative association between MoCA score and time to complete the WTMT (r =-0.63, p=0.001) was found for all participants. Differences in average velocity between pods were found between YA and older adults (PD and OA). CONCLUSIONS: Individuals with lower MoCA score required more time to complete the WTMT. Differences in walking velocity between groups suggest older adults (PD and OA) required more time to identify and process target location in addition to walking to targets. Future research should investigate the use of the WTMT to maintain or enhance executive function in people with PD. Supported by McKinstry Fellows Research Program.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.062
Threshold uncertainty score0.279

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.005
GPT teacher head0.182
Teacher spread0.177 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTopSCHOLAR (Western Kentucky University)Same topicEnzyme Production and CharacterizationFrench-language works237,207