SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Continuous force measurements reveal no inhibitory control deficits in Parkinson's disease.

Exp Brain Res · 2020-03-28

DOI: 10.1007/s00221-020-05768-0PMID: 32222777

Open accessresearch-article; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

Suppression of unwanted motor responses can be disrupted by Parkinson's disease. People with Parkinson's (PwP) can show maladaptive reward-driven behaviours in the form of impulse control behaviours, which are associated with the use of the dopaminergic treatments used to alleviate the motor symptoms of the disease. However, the effects of Parkinson's itself on impulsive behaviour and control are unclear-empirical studies have yielded mixed findings, and some imaging studies have shown a functional deficit in the absence of a measurable change in behaviour. Here, we investigated the effects of Parkinson's on response activation and control by studying the dynamics of response in standard inhibitory control tasks-the Stop Signal and Simon tasks-using a continuous measure of response force. Our results are largely in favour of the conclusion that response inhibition appears to be intact in PwP, even when using a more sensitive measure of behavioural control relative to traditional button-press measures. Our findings provide some clarity as to the effects of Parkinson's on response inhibition and show continuous response force measurement can provide a sensitive means of detecting erroneous response activity in PwP, which could also be generalised to studying related processes in other populations.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.