Research overview
The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by
IntroductionCognitive impairment is a persistent and increasingly reported symptom of patients with Parkinson's disease (PD), significantly affecting daily functioning quality. This study aims to evaluate the functional connectivity of the brain network in patients with Parkinson's disease with various severities of cognitive decline using quantitative electroencephalography (EEG) analysis.MethodsBased on the EEG recorded in the resting state, the coherence and phase lag index were calculated to evaluate functional connectivity in 108 patients with Parkinson's disease divided into three groups according to their cognitive condition: dementia due to PD (PD-D), PD and mild cognitive impairment (PD-MCI) and cognitively normal patients (PD-CogN).ResultsIt was found that there were significantly different coherence values in the PD-D group compared to PD-CogN in different frequency bands. In most cases, there was a decrease in coherence in PD-D compared to PD-CogN. The most specific changes were revealed in the theta frequency band in the temporal right-frontal left and temporal right-frontal right regions. In the alpha frequency band, the most significant decreases were shown in the occipital right-frontal left and occipital left-frontal right areas. There were also statistically significant differences in phase lag index between many areas, especially in the theta frequency range.ConclusionsThese findings indicate that the functional connectivity patterns of coherence and phase lag index - found in a particular frequency band and region - could become a reliable biomarker for identifying cognitive impairment and differentiating its severity in PD patients.
Scientific assessment
Research question
Assess the question within the original study’s scope.
Methods & sample
Check the source article for study design and sample details.
Key findings
An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.
Limitations
Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.
Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.