NeuralCipher Research overview
The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by
IntroductionParkinson's disease (PD) is the second most common neurodegenerative disorder. The risk of frailty is significantly higher in patients with PD than in age-matched individuals without PD. This study aimed to develop a machine learning-based predictive model for frailty in PD.MethodsWe conducted a cross-sectional study of early- and middle-stage PD patients recruited from June 2024 to June 2025 at Shenzhen People's Hospital. Frailty was assessed using the Fried criteria (five components: gait speed, grip strength, physical activity, fatigue, and weight loss). A total of 42 demographic and clinical variables, including disease history, Montreal cognitive assessment (MoCA), and unified Parkinson's disease rating scale (MDS-UPDRS) scores, were collected and compared between PD patients with and without frailty. Spearman correlation and LASSO regression were used to identify independent risk factors. Multiple machine learning algorithms were applied to construct predictive models. Model performance was evaluated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, area under the ROC curve (AUC), decision curve analysis (DCA), calibration plots, and forest plots.ResultsA total of 205 PD patients were enrolled (133 non-frail, 72 frail; mean age non-frail 62.92 ± 9.69 years, frail 68.13 ± 8.44 years). Significant group differences were found in sex (p = 0.013), age (p p p p = 0.010), MoCA (p p = 0.001), and Hamilton anxiety rating scale (HAMA) (p ConclusionFrailty in PD was associated with female sex, older age, alcohol use, and more advanced disease severity. Patients with PD and frailty exhibited higher MDS-UPDRS scores, more severe cognitive impairment, and greater levels of depression and anxiety. Integrating clinical data with machine learning, especially logistic regression, provides a reliable and scalable tool for early identification and risk stratification of frailty in PD.
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.