MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7132929557

Role of Inferior Frontoparietal Structures in Motor Control and Freezing of Gait in Parkinson’s Disease

2021· dissertation· W7132929557 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Julianne Baarbé

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2021
Typedissertation
Language
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMotor Control and Adaptation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsGaitHypokinesiaSittingScalpMotor controlParkinson's diseaseDiseaseMotor cortexCentral nervous system disease
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Freezing of gait (FOG) is a disabling symptom of Parkinson’s disease (PD) in which patients are unable to step forward when desired. Abnormal brain circuits responsible for FOG in PD patients are unclear and experimental paradigms are needed to address this disabling symptom. We hypothesized that motor interruptions of lower limb movements while seated may be related to FOG and may indicate abnormal brain activities. In Study 1, we tested 19 PD patients and 20 healthy controls and showed that motor interruption or cessation of bilateral stepping while sitting correlated with the presence and severity of FOG and this effect persisted in the “on” dopaminergic medication state. In Study 2, we tested how these “lower limb motor blocks” or LLMB are related to changes in 4-30 Hz cortical activities recorded from 64-channel scalp electroencephalography. In 17 PD patients, we found that sporadic LLMB differed from typical steps in the right angular gyrus (RAG, F=154.6, P=0.0185, before and during LLMB>typical steps). LLMB also differed from cued stops in the right inferior frontal gyrus (F=32.0, P=0.0005, before LLMB>cued stops; F=42.0, P=0.0005, during LLMB

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.261 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpace→Same topicMotor Control and Adaptation→French-language works237,207→