Neurological Soft Signs, Cognition and Sensory Phenomena in Obsessive Compulsive Disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background: Neurological soft signs (NSS), cognitive deficits, and sensory phenomena are increasingly recognized in obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), suggesting neurobiological underpinnings. However, their interrelationships and clinical significance remain unclear. This study examines NSS, cognition, and sensory phenomena in OCD patients compared to healthy controls. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted on 35 OCD patients and 35 matched healthy controls. Neurological soft signs were assessed using the Neurological Evaluation Scale (NES), cognitive function was evaluated with the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), and sensory phenomena were measured using the University of São Paulo Sensory Phenomena Scale (USP-SPS). The Yale-Brown Obsessive-Compulsive Scale (Y-BOCS) assessed OCD severity, and the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS) evaluated depressive symptoms. Statistical analyses included group comparisons and correlation analyses. Results: OCD patients exhibited significantly higher NSS scores (21.49 ± 6.98) compared to controls (16.63 ± 3.83, p = 0.002), with pronounced deficits in sensory integration (p = 0.003) and sequencing of motor acts (p = 0.009). Cognitive impairment was evident, with OCD patients scoring lower in MoCA total scores (26.74 ± 2.05 vs. 27.71 ± 0.93, p = 0.019), particularly in visuospatial/executive function (p = 0.034) and memory (p = 0.045). Sensory phenomena were more frequent in OCD patients, with 48.6% reporting abnormal sensory experiences (p = 0.041). NSS and sensory phenomena correlated positively with OCD severity (r = 0.28, p = 0.041), while depressive symptoms also showed a significant association with OCD severity (r = 0.52, p < 0.001). Conclusion: OCD patients exhibit increased neurological soft signs, cognitive deficits, and sensory phenomena compared to healthy controls. The association between NSS, sensory phenomena, and OCD severity highlights potential neurobiological dysfunctions in OCD. Future studies should explore underlying neural mechanisms and their therapeutic implications.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.002 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".