Motivational disturbances and cognitive effort-based decision-making in Parkinson's disease

IF 3.4 3区 医学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Parkinsonism & related disorders Pub Date : 2025-03-18 DOI:10.1016/j.parkreldis.2025.107355
Bonnie M. Scott , Robert S. Eisinger , Roshan Mara , Amtul-noor Rana , Anika Bhatia , Sable Thompson , Michael S. Okun , Aysegul Gunduz , Dawn Bowers
{"title":"Motivational disturbances and cognitive effort-based decision-making in Parkinson's disease","authors":"Bonnie M. Scott ,&nbsp;Robert S. Eisinger ,&nbsp;Roshan Mara ,&nbsp;Amtul-noor Rana ,&nbsp;Anika Bhatia ,&nbsp;Sable Thompson ,&nbsp;Michael S. Okun ,&nbsp;Aysegul Gunduz ,&nbsp;Dawn Bowers","doi":"10.1016/j.parkreldis.2025.107355","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Motivational disturbances, such as apathy and impulse control disorders (ICDs), frequently co-occur in patients with Parkinson's disease (PD). The assessment of these motivational disturbances has proven to be challenging due the absence of validated objective behavioral measures for evaluating motivation in older adults. This scenario may contribute to underdiagnosis. The present study aimed to investigate the clinical utility of a modified version of an existing effort-based decision-making task which required cognitive (e.g., working memory) instead of physical (e.g., finger tapping) effort.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Ninety-five non-demented individuals (45–85 years of age) with idiopathic PD completed a cognitive screening measure, self-report questionnaires, and a cognitive adaptation of the Effort Expenditure for Rewards Task (COG-EEfRT), which is a multi-trial game where a participant can choose whether to expend greater effort for larger rewards which vary in magnitude and probability. Patients were classified as having clinically significant symptoms of apathy and/or an ICD based on recommended cut-off scores on the Apathy Scale (AS) and Questionnaire for Impulse Control Disorders in Parkinson's Disease – Rating Scale (QUIP-RS). The methodological cutoffs defined two groups: Apathy (36.8 %), and ICD (48.4 %).</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The level of effort expended by patients significantly predicted apathy and ICD status with high accuracy (88.2 % and 82.4 %, respectively), above and beyond age, levodopa equivalent dose and self-report measures of motivation. Additionally, we found that greater symptoms of apathy and ICD (i.e., negative urgency) were significantly correlated with patients choosing to expend greater effort. This result varied based on reward probability and outcome.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>We offer preliminary evidence suggesting the clinical utility of the COG-EEfRT for identifying and quantifying motivational disturbances in PD. Additionally, anticipatory anhedonia and impulsive traits may be important predictors of cognitive effort-based decision-making. Compared to tasks requiring physical effort, the COG-EEfRT may be a more suitable tool for PD and perhaps for people with motor impairment.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":19970,"journal":{"name":"Parkinsonism & related disorders","volume":"134 ","pages":"Article 107355"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Parkinsonism & related disorders","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1353802025000963","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Motivational disturbances, such as apathy and impulse control disorders (ICDs), frequently co-occur in patients with Parkinson's disease (PD). The assessment of these motivational disturbances has proven to be challenging due the absence of validated objective behavioral measures for evaluating motivation in older adults. This scenario may contribute to underdiagnosis. The present study aimed to investigate the clinical utility of a modified version of an existing effort-based decision-making task which required cognitive (e.g., working memory) instead of physical (e.g., finger tapping) effort.

Methods

Ninety-five non-demented individuals (45–85 years of age) with idiopathic PD completed a cognitive screening measure, self-report questionnaires, and a cognitive adaptation of the Effort Expenditure for Rewards Task (COG-EEfRT), which is a multi-trial game where a participant can choose whether to expend greater effort for larger rewards which vary in magnitude and probability. Patients were classified as having clinically significant symptoms of apathy and/or an ICD based on recommended cut-off scores on the Apathy Scale (AS) and Questionnaire for Impulse Control Disorders in Parkinson's Disease – Rating Scale (QUIP-RS). The methodological cutoffs defined two groups: Apathy (36.8 %), and ICD (48.4 %).

Results

The level of effort expended by patients significantly predicted apathy and ICD status with high accuracy (88.2 % and 82.4 %, respectively), above and beyond age, levodopa equivalent dose and self-report measures of motivation. Additionally, we found that greater symptoms of apathy and ICD (i.e., negative urgency) were significantly correlated with patients choosing to expend greater effort. This result varied based on reward probability and outcome.

Conclusion

We offer preliminary evidence suggesting the clinical utility of the COG-EEfRT for identifying and quantifying motivational disturbances in PD. Additionally, anticipatory anhedonia and impulsive traits may be important predictors of cognitive effort-based decision-making. Compared to tasks requiring physical effort, the COG-EEfRT may be a more suitable tool for PD and perhaps for people with motor impairment.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
帕金森病的动机障碍和基于认知努力的决策
动机障碍,如冷漠和冲动控制障碍(ICDs),经常在帕金森病(PD)患者中同时发生。由于缺乏有效的客观行为措施来评估老年人的动机,对这些动机干扰的评估已被证明是具有挑战性的。这种情况可能导致诊断不足。本研究旨在调查现有的基于努力的决策任务的改进版本的临床效用,该任务需要认知(例如,工作记忆)而不是身体(例如,手指敲击)的努力。方法95例45-85岁的非痴呆特发性PD患者完成了认知筛查、自我报告问卷和对奖励努力支出任务(COG-EEfRT)的认知适应,该任务是一个多试验游戏,参与者可以选择是否付出更大的努力来获得不同大小和概率的更大奖励。根据冷漠量表(as)和帕金森病冲动控制障碍问卷-评定量表(QUIP-RS)的推荐分值,将患者分类为具有临床显著的冷漠症状和/或ICD。方法截点定义了两组:冷漠(36.8%)和ICD(48.4%)。结果患者付出的努力水平、年龄、左旋多巴当量剂量和自我报告的动机指标对冷漠和ICD状态的预测准确率均较高(分别为88.2%和82.4%)。此外,我们发现,更大的冷漠症状和ICD(即,负紧迫性)与患者选择花费更大的努力显着相关。这个结果根据奖励概率和结果而变化。结论我们提供了初步的证据,表明cog - efrt在识别和量化PD的动机障碍方面具有临床应用价值。此外,预期性快感缺乏症和冲动特征可能是认知努力决策的重要预测因子。与需要体力劳动的任务相比,cog - efrt可能是一个更适合PD和运动障碍患者的工具。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Parkinsonism & related disorders
Parkinsonism & related disorders 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
4.90%
发文量
292
审稿时长
39 days
期刊介绍: Parkinsonism & Related Disorders publishes the results of basic and clinical research contributing to the understanding, diagnosis and treatment of all neurodegenerative syndromes in which Parkinsonism, Essential Tremor or related movement disorders may be a feature. Regular features will include: Review Articles, Point of View articles, Full-length Articles, Short Communications, Case Reports and Letter to the Editor.
期刊最新文献
Impaired processing of time-critical language information in Parkinson's disease. Biological characteristics of individuals with REM sleep behavior disorder: A multicenter prospective longitudinal cohort. Multimodal biomarkers to predict dementia-free survival and cognitive decline in mild cognitive impairment with Lewy bodies. Expert commentary for misleading EEG in CACNA1A mutation: A case of late-onset Episodic Ataxia Type 2. Diverse paths of phenotypic evolution in functional movement disorders: A longitudinal perspective.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1