ArticlePloS one2022
Alternate fluency in Parkinson's disease: A machine learning analysis.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Psychometrics and diagnostics of the Italian version of the Alternate Verbal Fluency Battery (AVFB) in non-demented Parkinson's disease patients.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2024Article
- Human-like problem-solving abilities in large language models using ChatGPT.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe aim of the present study was to investigate whether patients with Parkinson's Disease (PD) had changes in their level of performance in extra-dimensional shifting by implementing a novel analysis method, utilizing the new alternate phonemic/semantic fluency test.
methodWe used machine learning (ML) in order to develop high accuracy classification between PD patients with high and low scores in the alternate fluency test.
resultsThe models developed resulted to be accurate in such classification in a range between 80% and 90%. The predictor which demonstrated maximum efficiency in classifying the participants as low or high performers was the semantic fluency test. The optimal cut-off of a decision rule based on this test yielded an accuracy of 86.96%. Following the removal of the semantic fluency test from the system, the parameter which best contributed to the classification was the phonemic fluency test. The best cut-offs were identified and the decision rule yielded an overall accuracy of 80.43%. Lastly, in order to evaluate the classification accuracy based on the shifting index, the best cut-offs based on an optimal single rule yielded an overall accuracy of 83.69%.
conclusionWe found that ML analysis of semantic and phonemic verbal fluency may be used to identify simple rules with high accuracy and good out of sample generalization, allowing the detection of executive deficits in patients with PD.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.