4.5 Article

Medication impairs probabilistic classification learning in Parkinson's disease

期刊

NEUROPSYCHOLOGIA
卷 48, 期 4, 页码 1096-1103

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2009.12.010

关键词

Parkinson's disease; Learning; Levodopa; Dopamine; Basal ganglia

资金

  1. National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, National Institute of Health, USA [RO1]
  2. Parkinson's Disease Society, UK
  3. Leverhulme/ESRC, UK
  4. Economic and Social Research Council [RES-538-28-1001] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In Parkinson's disease (PD), it is possible that tonic increase of dopamine associated with levodopa medication overshadows phasic release of dopamine, which is essential for learning. Thus while the motor symptoms of PD are improved with levodopa medication, learning would be disrupted. To test this hypothesis, we investigated the effect of levodopa medication on learning on the weather prediction task (WPT), which involves probabilistic classification learning. I I PD patients and 13 matched controls completed 200 trials of the WPT, with the patients either on or off their usual levodopa medication. Consistent with prior studies, when PD patients were assessed on medication, overall WPT performance was significantly worse than controls. However, when these patients were studied following withdrawal from medication, overall performance was equivalent to controls, and significantly better than when on medication. The significant deterioration of learning on the WPT in PD patients when on compared to off medication supports the proposal that tonic increase of dopamine with dopaminergic medication masks phasic changes in dopamine release essential for learning. These results highlight the need for careful 'titration' of dopaminergic medication to produce the desired improvement of the motor symptoms without the associated detrimental effects on cognition and learning. (C) 2010 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据