SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Facial emotion expressivity in patients with Parkinson's and Alzheimer's disease.

J Neural Transm (Vienna) · 2023-10-07

DOI: 10.1007/s00702-023-02699-2PMID: 37804428

Open accessResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov't; research-article; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

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

Parkinson's disease (PD) and Alzheimer's disease (AD) are neurodegenerative disorders with some overlapping clinical features. Hypomimia (reduced facial expressivity) is a prominent sign of PD and it is also present in AD. However, no study has experimentally assessed hypomimia in AD and compared facial expressivity between PD and AD patients. We compared facial emotion expressivity in patients with PD, AD, and healthy controls (HCs). Twenty-four PD patients, 24 AD patients and 24 HCs were videotaped during neutral facial expressions and while posing six facial emotions (anger, surprise, disgust, fear, happiness, and sadness). Fifteen raters were asked to evaluate the videos using MDS-UPDRS-III (item 3.2) and to identify the corresponding emotion from a seven-forced-choice response format. We measured the percentage of accuracy, the reaction time (RT), and the confidence level (CL) in the perceived accuracy of the raters' responses. We found the highest MDS-UPDRS 3.2 scores in PD, and higher in AD than HCs. When evaluating the posed expression captures, raters identified a lower percentage of correct answers in the PD and AD groups than HCs. There was no difference in raters' response accuracy between the PD and AD. No difference was observed in RT and CL data between groups. Hypomimia in patients correlated positively with the global MDS-UPDRS-III and negatively with Mini Mental State Examination scores. PD and AD patients have a similar pattern of reduced facial emotion expressivity compared to controls. These findings hold potential pathophysiological and clinical implications.

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.