MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W78204477

[Clinical characteristics in Parkinson's disease patients with cognitive impairment and effects of cognitive impairment on sleep].

2013· article· en· W78204477 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Yan Gong, Kangping Xiong, Chengjie Mao, Juan-ying Huang, Weidong Hu, Fei Han, Rui Chen, Chun‐Feng Liu

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMontreal Cognitive AssessmentEpworth Sleepiness ScaleHamdPolysomnographyParkinson's diseaseInternal medicineMedicineRating scaleCognitionCognitive impairmentPhysical therapyPsychologyDiseasePsychiatryApnea
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the clinical characteristics, correlation factors and clinical heterogeneities in Parkinson's disease (PD) patients with cognitive impairment and identify whether cognitive impairment could influence the aspect of sleep. METHODS: A total of 130 PD outpatients and inpatients of sleep center at our hospital were eligible for participation. According to Montreal cognitive assessment (MOCA), they were divided into cognitive normal group (MOCA ≥ 26) (n = 51) and cognitive impairment group (MOCA < 26) (n = 79). Their clinical characteristics were mainly evaluated by unified Parkinson's disease rating scale (UPDRS) , Hoehn-Yahr (H-Y) stage, Hamilton depression scale (HAMD-24 item) and Epworth sleepiness scale (ESS). And all of them underwent video-polysomnography (PSG). RESULTS: The proportion of cognitive impairment (MOCA < 26) was 60.76%. Compared to those without cognitive impairment, the PD patients with cognitive impairment had significantly higher score of HAMD (10 ± 7 vs 7 ± 4), increased incidence of hallucinations (40.50% vs 19.60%) and REM behavior disorders (RBD) (63.29% vs 39.21%), significantly higher H-Y stage [2.5(2.0-3.0) vs 2.0 (2.0-2.5)] , United Kingdom Parkinson Disease Society (UPDRS) part III (22 ± 10 vs 19 ± 10) and levodopa-equivalent daily dose (LED) (511 ± 302vs 380 ± 272) (all P < 0.05). However, no significant differences existed in the subscores of MOCA between PD patients with different sides of onset and motor subtypes of onset (all P > 0.05). Non-conditional Logistic regression analysis showed that PD duration, score of HAMD and H-Y stage were the major influencing factors of cognition. On PSG, significantly decreased sleep efficiency (57% ± 21% vs 66% ± 17%), higher percentage of non-REM sleep stage 1 (NREMS1) (37% ± 21% vs 27% ± 13%), lower percentage of NREMS2 (40% ± 17% vs 46% ± 13%) and REM sleep (39% ± 28% vs 54% ± 36%) were found for PD patients with cognitive impairment (all P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: The PD patients with cognitive impairment have more severe disease and partial nonmotor symptoms. And the severity of disease and depression is closely associated with cognitive impairment. Cognitive impairment may also affect sleep to cause decreased sleep efficiency and severe sleep structure disorder.

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)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.224 · 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

Citations2
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMed→French-language works237,207→