ArticleJournal of Parkinson's disease2022
Cognitive Performance and Learning Parameters Predict Response to Working Memory Training in Parkinson's Disease.
Article in Journal of Parkinson's disease, 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, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWorking memory (WM) training (WMT) is a popular intervention approach against cognitive decline in patients with Parkinson's disease (PD). However, heterogeneity in WM responsiveness suggests that WMT may not be equally efficient for all patients.
objectiveThe present study aims to evaluate a multivariate model to predict post-intervention verbal WM in patients with PD using a supervised machine learning approach. We test the predictive potential of novel learning parameters derived from the WMT and compare their predictiveness to other more commonly used domains including demographic, clinical, and cognitive data.
methods37 patients with PD (age: 64.09±8.56, 48.6% female, 94.7% Hoehn & Yahr stage 2) participated in a 5-week WMT. Four random forest regression models including 1) cognitive variables only, 2) learning parameters only, 3) both cognitive and learning variables, and 4) the entire set of variables (with additional demographic and clinical data, 'all' model), were built to predict immediate and 3-month-follow-up WM.
resultThe 'all' model predicted verbal WM with the lowest root mean square error (RMSE) compared to the other models, at both immediate (RMSE = 0.184; 95% -CI=[0.184;0.185]) and 3-month follow-up (RMSE = 0.216; 95% -CI=[0.215;0.217]). Cognitive baseline parameters were among the most important predictors in the 'all' model. The model combining cognitive and learning parameters significantly outperformed the model solely based on cognitive variables.
conclusionCommonly assessed demographic, clinical, and cognitive variables provide robust prediction of response to WMT. Nonetheless, inclusion of training-inherent learning parameters further boosts precision of prediction models which in turn may augment training benefits following cognitive interventions 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.