Information-processing deficits and cognitive dysfunction in panic disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The plasticity of the startle reflex, including prepulse inhibition (PPI) and habituation, provides operational measures of information processing that are abnormal in several neuropsychiatric disorders characterized by deficits in suppression or inhibition of intrusive or irrelevant stimuli. Clinically, patients with panic disorder (PD) have been described as having difficulties in the inhibition of their response to sensory and cognitive events. Because such difficulties may be the result of failures in early stages of information processing, we hypothesized that startle reactivity, PPI and habituation are deficient in unmedicated patients with PD. Moreover, we tested whether there was a relation between startle reflex measures and dysfunctional cognition. METHODS: Fourteen unmedicated patients with PD (7 men, 7 women) and 28 healthy comparison subjects (14 men, 14 women) were recruited. Acoustic startle reactivity, habituation and PPI (30-ms, 60-ms, 120-ms, 240-ms and 2000-ms interstimulus intervals) were assessed in the patients with PD and the age-matched and sex-matched healthy controls. These data for unmedicated patients with PD were compared with those for 24 medicated patients with PD. Moreover, dysfunctional cognition in patients with PD was measured using the Body Sensations Questionnaire. RESULTS: Unmedicated patients with PD exhibited increased startle reactivity, reduced habituation and significantly reduced PPI in the 30-ms, 60-ms, 120-ms and 240-ms prepulse conditions. Furthermore, in unmedicated patients with PD, increased startle response and decreased habituation were correlated significantly with higher cognitive dysfunction scores, but this was not the case for PPI. CONCLUSIONS: These data indicate that the early stages of sensory information processing are abnormal in patients with PD in the absence of medication. The observed deficits in PPI and habituation could reflect a more generalized difficulty in suppressing or gating information in PD. The correlation between cognitive symptoms and higher startle response and deficient habituation supports the hypothesis that subjects with PD have abnormalities in the early stages of information processing that lead to a cascade of downstream effects on cognition.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".