Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Brain and Behavior logoLink to Brain and Behavior
. 2016 Oct 19;7(1):e00590. doi: 10.1002/brb3.590

Side‐of‐onset of Parkinson's disease in relation to neuropsychological measures

Edward J Modestino 1,✉, Chioma Amenechi 1, AnnaMarie Reinhofer 1, Patrick O'Toole 1
PMCID: PMC5256177  PMID: 28127512

Abstract

Background

Parkinson's disease (PD) usually emerges with a unilateral side‐of‐onset (left‐onset: LOPD; right‐onset: ROPD; Marinus & van Hilten, 2015) due to an asymmetrical degeneration of striatal dopaminergic neurons (Donnemiller et al., Brain, 135, 2012, 3348). This has led to a body of research exploring the cognitive, neuropsychological, and clinical differences between LOPD and ROPD (e.g., Verreyt et al., Neuropsychology Review, 21, 2011, 405).

Methods

Thirty ROPD and 14 LOPD cases were drawn from a Boston clinic specializing in PD. Various cognitive and neuropsychological measures were used in an attempt to discover if there were indeed any differences between LOPD and ROPD in this cohort.

Results

For LOPD, duration of illness was found to be significantly greater than that of ROPD. However, further testing was able to confirm that despite this difference, it was not the cause of the other significant differences found. Furthermore, this increased duration was consistent with a previous study (Munhoz et al., Parkinsonism and Related Disorders, 19, 2013, 77). Performance on the Digit Span Backward (DSB) was found to be significantly poorer in LOPD than ROPD, suggesting compromised executive function in LOPD. Additionally, LOPD had significantly greater anxiety on the DASS Anxiety scales than ROPD. However, unlike Foster et al (Cognitive and Behavioral Neurology, 23, 2010, 4), this increased anxiety could not account for the poorer performance on the DSB for LOPD. Finally, ROPD had significantly greater magical ideation than LOPD, which can be explained by the theory put forth by Brugger and Graves (European Archives of Psychiatry, 247, 1997, 55).

Conclusion

Clear and significant differences between LOPD and ROPD were found within our cohort. LOPD showed greater impairment of working memory, greater anxiety, and greater duration of illness—all independent of one another; whereas, those with ROPD had greater magical ideation, also independent of any other variables.

Keywords: cognitive, neuropsychology, Parkinson's disease, Side‐of‐onset

1. Introduction

Initially, when patients are diagnosed with Parkinson's disease (PD), they often report that motor symptoms appear unilaterally (Marinus & van Hilten, 2015). Although PD eventually progresses to bilateral symptoms, the initial side‐of‐onset (LOPD: left‐onset PD, ROPD: right‐onset PD) may still show more severe symptoms throughout disease progression (Marinus & van Hilten, 2015). This is due to greater degeneration of dopaminergic neurons in the dorsal striatum of the brain hemisphere contralateral to the body's side‐of‐onset (Donnemiller et al., 2012). This asymmetric depletion leads to further dysfunction of the neural circuits connected to the basal ganglia, which influence cognitive abilities (Verreyt et al., 2011). Additionally, it has been reported that brain asymmetry may have a role in emotion and/or motivation (Fetterman, Ode, & Robinson, 2013). Based on this asymmetrical degeneration, much research has focused on the cognitive/neuropsychological and even clinical differences between LOPD and ROPD (e.g., Verreyt et al., 2011). However, recent research has suggested that the cognitive differences are not seen in the recently diagnosed, unmedicated, early stage of PD, such as those in Hoehn and Yahr (H&Y) Stage 1 (Erro et al., 2013; Pellicano et al., 2015). In the conclusion of one of these studies, it was suggested that reported cognitive differences between LOPD and ROPD in previous studies may in fact be due to medication treatment (Pellicano et al., 2015). However, this is counterintuitive and questionable considering that all patients, both LOPD and ROPD, have been on treatment prior to and/or during studies showing these differences. In other words, the most notable, if not the only, difference between groups in these studies should be side‐of‐onset. Poletti et al. (2013) has suggested an alternative explanation that with greater progression of PD, cognitive differences between LOPD and ROPD may become more obvious. The proceeding is a review of studies that, overwhelmingly, suggest these differences are indeed authentic.

ROPD has been associated with cognitive/neuropsychological and clinical differences when compared with LOPD and/or controls. Verreyt et al. (2011) provided a review which summarized the deficits in ROPD related to tasks involving language and verbal memory. Cheesman et al. (2005) also found this verbal memory deficit in ROPD. Additionally, verbal creativity deficits have been seen in ROPD (Drago, Foster, Skidmore, & Heilman, 2009). Those with ROPD show a deficit in mental rotation related to one's self‐view (Bowen, Burns, Brady, & Yahr, 1976; Cronin‐Golomb, 2010). In the clinical domain, those with ROPD have shown differences such as greater apathy (Bogdanova & Cronin‐Golomb, 2012), more severe psychosis (Cubo, 2010), and longer duration of illness associated with greater anxiety and depressive symptoms (Foster et al., 2011).

Similarly, LOPD has also been associated with cognitive/neuropsychological and clinical differences when compared with ROPD and/or controls. Verreyt et al. (2011) imparted deficits in spatial attention, visuospatial orienting and memory, and mental imagery in LOPD. Consistent with these visual deficits in LOPD, deficits in visuospatial ability/attention (Norton, Jaywant, Gallart‐Palau, & Cronin‐Golomb, 2015; Poletti et al., 2013) and spatial planning (Cheesman et al., 2005) have been found. Interestingly, a deficit in spatial memory was shown to be associated with smaller substantia nigra volume (using MRI) in LOPD (Foster, Black, Antenor‐Dorsey, Perlmutter, & Hershey, 2008; Those with LOPD have shown significant impairment of working memory on the Digit Span Backward (DSB) task, which was associated with significantly greater depression in one study (Foster et al., 2013) and significantly greater anxiety in another study (Foster et al., 2010). Furthermore, those with LOPD show a deficit in mental rotation related to object‐view (Cronin‐Golomb, 2010; Lee, Harris, & Calvert, 1998). With regard to pragmatics (meaning), those with LOPD have shown a deficit in language fluency, using fewer verbs, and constructing shorter sentences (Holtgraves, McNamara, Cappaert, & Durso, 2010). Additionally, deficits in prosodic emotional recognition/emotional tone of voice (Ventura et al., 2012) and religiosity (Butler, McNamara, & Durso, 2011; Giaquinto & Bruti, 2011) have been seen in LOPD. In the clinical domain, those with LOPD have shown differences in greater duration of illness (Munhoz et al., 2013), decreased self‐awareness of motor deficits (Maier et al., 2012), greater risk of dementia and REM sleep behavior disorder (Baumann, Held, Valko, Wienecke, & Waldvogel, 2014), and greater severity of depression (Dewey, Tajena, & McClintock, 2013).

2. Methods

2.1. Objectives

Based on the studies in the preceding review, it appears that there are indeed cognitive, neuropsychological, and clinical differences between LOPD and ROPD. As we had access to these populations ourselves, we decided to examine any and all differences between LOPD and ROPD. Based on previous research, we decided to use a range of cognitive and neuropsychological measures. We hypothesized that there would be a greater working memory deficit in LOPD, as shown using the DSB task, that might be associated with greater depression (Foster et al., 2013) and anxiety (Foster et al., 2010). Thus, we paired the use of the DSB with measures of depression and anxiety (DASS; see 2.3 for details). Based on the evidence of more severe psychosis in ROPD (Cubo, 2010), we also hypothesized increased schizotypy as shown in a measure of magical ideation (MIS; again, please refer to the 2.3 section for specifics on measures) in ROPD. Other than these hypotheses, we followed a data‐driven approach, free of the biases of strict hypothesis‐driven approaches. We were open to the possibility that there may be many cognitive, neuropsychological, and clinical differences between LOPD and ROPD, based on previous research findings. We wanted the data to tell us what was indeed there without automatically restricting hypotheses which could obscure the truth in the data. Furthermore, since we employed measures previously used in other studies, and since replication is the cornerstone of scientific research, we had hoped to add to the body of current literature, and perhaps find evidence consistent with previous research.

2.2. Participants: behavioral experiment

In the behavioral experiment, all participants were diagnosed with idiopathic Parkinson's disease by a board certified movement disorders specialist, and Director of Movement Disorders clinics at the Boston VA who recruited patients for the study from the Veteran's Administration Health System in Boston, MA, USA. Based on our recruitment at the VA, the majority were veterans.

This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) of VA Boston Healthcare System in Jamaica Plain, Boston, MA, USA. All participants completed an informed consent as specified and approved by said IRB. A consecutive sampling method was employed which was based upon the time allotted for the study and the budget. Our patients were primarily recruited by their physician in the PD clinic, based on who came in. They were asked if they wished to participate. Those who followed up (self‐selecting) were scheduled, and paid $10 an hour for participation in the neuropsychological testing and $30 for returning the take‐home packet of inventories. Exclusionary criteria included dementia or severe cognitive impairment based on measures of mental status (refer to measures in 2.3). We made sure that both side‐of‐onset groups were equivalent in measures of mental status and age of onset of illness.

2.3. Procedures: neuropsychological testing

All participants were given a battery of neuropsychological tests to assess possible comorbid dementia and cognitive impairment while on medication. These included the Mini‐Mental State Examination (MMSE; Nazem et al., 2009), the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA; Nasreddine et al., 2005), the Wechsler Test of Adult Reading (WTAR; Holdnack, 2001), the Matrix Reasoning test which is a subtest within the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS; Wechsler, 2008), Digit Span Backward (DSB; a subtest of the Wechsler Memory Scale–III; Wechsler, 1997), and the Stroop test (Stroop, 1935). Additionally, participants were assessed for mood function using the Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale (DASS; Henry & Crawford, 2005) and the Magical Ideation Scale (MIS; Eckblad & Chapman, 1983).

Levodopa equivalency dosages (LED), to be used in statistical analyses, were calculated using standardized formulae to compare dosing levels across the variety of dopamine replacement therapies that our participants with PD were taking (Tomlinson et al., 2010). All testing reported in this paper was completed on medication.

2.4. Behavioral data processing and statistical analysis

Simple analysis of means was completed within Excel. Additionally, data were exported from Excel for hypothesis testing in IBM SPSS.

We employed multivariate mixed‐effects linear regression analyses to test for associations between the side‐of‐onset (dependent variable) and neuropsychological and clinical measures (independent variables). All models were adjusted for age, education, sex, and handedness. All significant findings were further teased apart in additional regressions to account for the true nature of interactions between all significant variables, which was done by switching independent and dependent variables. We allowed for outcome‐specific fixed effects and subject‐specific and measure‐specific random effects. These multivariate analyses are more realistic models of the outcomes than using independent regression models for each outcome. Since all information within each subject is utilized, we are able to provide more interpretable and consistent results than simpler statistical models. Moreover, the problem of multiple comparisons is removed when viewed from these models (Gelman, Hill, & Yajima, 2012). These multivariate models provide higher power for detecting small but clinically important differences compared to independent regression models for each outcome (Goldstein, 2010). These analyses were performed using IBM SPSS Statistics (version 22, IBM, Armonk, NY, USA). It was clear that choosing this specific analysis would divulge the true nature and interactions between all of these variables.

3. Results

In the behavioral experiment, the participants included patients (n = 44; 41 males, three females) diagnosed with idiopathic Parkinson's disease. The mean age was 68.818 years within a range of 42:89 years. Side‐of‐onset included 14 LOPD (one female) and 30 ROPD (two females). Race consisted of 40 Caucasians, two African‐Americans, and one Native‐American. The majority of the participants were right handed (n = 29), some were left handed (n = 6), and some ambidextrous (n = 9). All but two (42 of the 44; 95.45%) were high school graduates. Thirty‐one (70.45%) had some college experience or an associate's degree. Twenty‐one (47.72%) had bachelor's degree. Nine (20.45%) had postgraduate degrees or at least 1 year of postbaccalaureate education. Years of education ranged from 4 to 22 years, with the mean at 14.96 years. The overall Hoehn and Yahr scale score median was 2 (Q1: 2, Q2: 2, Q3: 3, Q4: 4; IQR: 1) within a range of 1:4, with the majority being H&Y stage 2 (n = 21), stage 1 (n = 2), stage 3 (n = 17), and stage 4 (n = 4). Thus, nearly 86% (86.36%, n = 38) were in stages 2–3. Duration of PD illness had a mean across the group of 6.375 years within a range of 1:20 years. Refer to Table 1 for details.

Table 1.

Demographics of PD participants

Participants N = 44 41 males 3 females
Handedness Right: 29 Left: 6 Ambidextrous: 9
Age Range: 42:89 years Mean: 68.818 years
Education Range: 4:22 years Mean: 14.96 years
side‐of‐onset LOPD: 14 (1 female) ROPD: 30 (2 females)
Duration of PD Range: 1:20 years Mean: 6.375 years
H&Y Q1: 2 Q2: 2 Q3: 3 Q4: 4 IQR: 1 Median: 2
Open in a new tab

LOPD, left‐onset Parkinson's disease; ROPD, right‐onset Parkinson's disease; H&Y, Hoehn and Yahr stage of Parkinson's disease; Q1:Q4, quartile values; IQR, Interquartile range (Q3‐Q1).

All results were obtained using multivariate mixed‐effects linear regression analysis (R 2 = .935) without the need to correct for multiple comparisons. Positive t values indicate significantly greater for ROPD; whereas, negative t values indicate significantly greater for LOPD. There were no significant effects of age, gender (sex), race, handedness, education, age of disease onset, levodopa equivalency dosages (LED), mood, or mental status as measured on the MMSE and MoCA on the dependent variable of side‐of‐onset (LOPD and ROPD). However, there was a significant effect (t 35 = −3.384, p = .007) of duration of illness for LOPD (mean: 6.5714 years with a range of 1:20 years) greater than ROPD (mean: 6.28 years with a range of 1:18 years). There was a significant (t 35 = 3.886, p = .003) difference in the DSB such that those with ROPD (mean: 6.3 with a range of 2:11) performed significantly greater than those with LOPD (mean: 5.9283 with a range of 4:8). Also, there was a significant (t 35 = 2.485, p = .032) difference in the MIS such that those with ROPD (mean: 5.8421, range of 0:13) scored significantly higher in magical ideation than those with LOPD (mean 2.6363, range of 0:10). Finally, there was a significant (t 35 = −4.843, p = .001) difference in the DASS Anxiety scale such that those with LOPD (mean 2.5, range of 1:4) suffered from significantly more anxiety than those with ROPD (mean 2.125, range of 1:5). A regression analysis collapsing across LOPD and ROPD, and using duration of illness as the dependent variable, with independent variables of MIS, DSB, and DASS anxiety failed to reach significance. Thus, the significant difference in the duration of illness between LOPD and ROPD cannot account for the differences between groups on the Magical Ideation Scale, the Digit Span Backward, or the DASS Anxiety. A regression analysis on LOPD data using DASS Anxiety as the dependent variable with Digit Span Backward as the independent variable failed to reach significance. Refer to Table 2 for a summary of these significant results.

Table 2.

Significant differences between sides of onset (dependent variable)

Test (independent variables) p value t value df LOPD X— ROPD X—
Duration .007 −3.384 35 6.5714 6.28
DSB .003 3.886 35 5.9283 6.3
MIS .032 2.485 35 2.6363 5.8421
DASS .001 −4.843 35 2.5 2.125
Open in a new tab

LOPD, left‐onset Parkinson's disease; ROPD, right‐onset Parkinson's disease; DSB, Digit Span Backward; MIS, Magical Ideation Scale; DASS, DASS Anxiety Scale.

All results were obtained using multivariate mixed‐effects linear regression analysis (R 2 = .935) without the need to correct for multiple comparisons. Positive t values indicate significantly greater for ROPD; whereas, negative t values indicate significantly greater for LOPD.

4. Discussion

We found duration of illness to be significantly greater in LOPD than ROPD within our sample. This is consistent with earlier findings that duration of illness has been shown to be greater in those with LOPD than ROPD in a group of those with a duration of illness longer than 20 years (Munhoz et al., 2013). Importantly, as we found a significant difference in duration as an independent variable within the regression model (dependent variable was side‐of‐onset), with LOPD significantly greater than ROPD, we were concerned that this difference between groups may have accounted for all the differences we saw between groups. However, collapsing across LOPD and ROPD and using disease duration as the dependent variable resulted in nothing of significance in any of the other measures. If any true differences in measures were simply due to duration of illness between groups, and not the groups themselves, they would have been revealed using this analysis. Thus, despite the significant difference in illness duration between LOPD and ROPD groups, the other significant differences that we found in other measures cannot be explained by this duration of illness. Interestingly, this same significant difference in duration of illness for LOPD (vs. ROPD) has been found in a previous study (Munhoz et al., 2013).

We found that there was a significant difference in performance of the Digit Span Backward, with LOPD scoring significantly poorer than ROPD. The Digit Span Backward is a subtest of the Wechsler Memory Scale–III (Wechsler, 1997). The Digit Span Forward is primarily a measure of short‐term attention; whereas, the Digit Span Backward expands on this to include working memory (Acton, 2013). Therefore, our results appear to indicate a significant difficulty in working memory for those with LOPD versus ROPD. This is consistent with previous research showing that those with LOPD have a greater cognitive decline as shown in various tests of executive functions, presumably due to greater degeneration of the right hemisphere dopamine system (Tomer, Levin, & Weiner, 1993). Foster et al. (2013) found this same decline in the Digit Span Backward in LOPD, however, it was limited to those with LOPD and comorbid depression. Importantly, our measure of depression from the DASS did not show anything of significance in relation to any of other measures, including the Digit Span Backward, in the model. Interestingly, in our study, LOPD experienced significantly more anxiety, as shown on the DASS anxiety measure, than those with ROPD. Foster et al. (2010) found that this greater anxiety in LOPD was associated with worse performance on the Digit Span Backward. Therefore, we considered the possibility that heightened anxiety seen in our sample of LOPD was associated with the decline in working memory as shown with poor performance on the Digit Span Backward task. However, a regression using anxiety scores among those with LOPD as the dependent variable (from DASS anxiety) failed to result in a significant covariance (either positive or negative) with the working memory scores from the Digit Span Backward. Thus, it appears that for this study, DASS anxiety scores did not show a significant relationship with working memory scores. It is unclear that anxiety played a role in poorer performance on a working memory task for LOPD in this study. Therefore, the greater anxiety seen in LOPD than ROPD may not have affected working memory in LOPD. However, there was still significantly more anxiety in LOPD than ROPD in this study. It could be the difference in our measure of anxiety versus that of Foster et al. (2010) that accounts for the differences in findings. The two (DASS anxiety measure for this study, and State‐Trait Anxiety Inventory for Foster et al., 2010) may not be measuring the exact same thing. Thus, anxiety may account for the working memory deficit we saw in LOPD in our study, even though higher anxiety (in our measure) we see in our LOPD did not covary with the DSB in a negative relationship. Alternatively, right hemispheric dopaminergic degeneration of the basal ganglia (specifically the striate) may somehow be affecting the right limbic system (including amygdala) connections to the prefrontal cortex that may account for higher anxiety in LOPD. However, there is merely speculation at this point. Foster et al. (2011) reported that duration of illness was positively associated with severity of anxiety and depressive symptoms in ROPD. However, in our study, greater anxiety was seen in LOPD, and duration as a dependent variable failed to reveal any significant covariance with any measure including DASS anxiety.

Finally, we found a significantly greater score in magical ideation on the MIS in ROPD than LOPD. As LED was used as an independent variable in the model and no significant effect was seen in LED between side‐of‐onset groups (dependent variable) for LED, this cannot explain the differences seen in magical ideation between groups. Brugger and Graves (1997) found right hemispatial neglect‐like inattentional behavior to be paired with increased scores on the MIS (a measure of schizotypy) in neurotypicals. They attributed this to be due to a left hemispheric hypodopaminergic state (relative to the right hemisphere) that led to the attentional bias (right inattention), but separately to a disinhibition of right hemispheric semantic regions. They further expounded that this disinhibition could lead to the magical thinking and possibly delusions. ROPD is associated with greater hypodopaminergic state in the left hemisphere leading to the initial motor symptoms in the right side of the body (Donnemiller et al., 2012). Thus, the assumption would be that in our ROPD (13 males and one female) with greater dopaminergic degeneration in the left hemisphere, there would also be higher MIS scores. This is in fact what we found. Furthermore, this is consistent with the literature suggesting more severe psychosis in ROPD (Cubo, 2010).

There were some notable limitations in this study. Based on the fact that this study was run out of and recruited from a VA hospital, a much larger sample were males. Furthermore, the discrepancy in laterality (side‐of‐onset), in addition to gender, was seen in this specific clinic. Far more patients in this specific clinic were ROPD than LOPD. The LOPD tends to be rare in this specific clinic. Thus, we simply used what we were able to obtain within our limited population. Future research with a more balanced gender and side‐of‐onset are needed to confirm these results.

5. Conclusion

In our cohort, the duration of illness was significantly greater for LOPD that cannot explain any of our other significant findings. We found that LOPD performed significantly poorer on the DSB, suggesting compromised executive functioning and also had significantly greater anxiety independent of one another. Finally, those with ROPD showed significantly greater magical ideation.

Conflict of Interests

None declared.

Acknowledgments

This research was partially supported by a grant from The John Templeton Foundation titled “The Neurology of Religious Cognition and Religious Experience” (Grant ID: 29245). The authors thank Raymon Durso, M.D. for his help with recruiting patients, and the research assistants in Patrick McNamara's lab at the VA for helping to collect the data.

Modestino EJ, Amenechi C, Reinhofer A, and O'Toole P. Side‐of‐onset of Parkinson's disease in relation to neuropsychological measures. Brain Behav. 2017;7:e00590. doi: 10.1002/brb3.590

Funding information

The John Templeton Foundation, Grant/Award Number: 29245 “The Neurology of Religious Cognition and Religious Experience”

References

  1. Acton Q. A. ed. (2013). Basal ganglia diseases—advances in research and treatment. (2013 ed., pp. 87). Atlanta, GA: ScholarlyEditions. [Google Scholar]
  2. Baumann, C. R. , Held, U. J. , Valko, P. O. , Wienecke, M. , & Waldvogel, D. (2014). Body side and predominant motor features at the onset of Parkinson's disease are linked to motor and nonmotor progression. Movement Disorders, 29, 207–213. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Bogdanova, Y. & Cronin‐Golomb, A. (2012). Neurocognitive correlates of apathy and anxiety in Parkinson's disease. Parkinson's Disease, 2012, 1–9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Bowen, F. P. , Burns, M. M. , Brady, E. M. , & Yahr, M. D. (1976). A note of alterations of personal orientation in Parkinsonism. Neuropsychologia, 14, 425–429. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Brugger, P. , & Graves, R. E. (1997). Right hemispatial inattention and magical ideation. European Archives of Psychiatry, 247, 55–57. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Butler, P. M. , McNamara, P. , & Durso, R. (2011). Side‐of‐onset in Parkinson's disease and alterations in religiosity: Novel behavioural phenotypes. Behavioural Neurology, 24, 133–141. doi:10.3233/BEN20110282 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Cheesman, A. L. , Barker, R. A. , Lewis, S. J. G. , Robbins, T. W. , Owen, A. M. , & Brooks, D. J. (2005). Lateralisation of striatal function: Evidence from 18F‐dopa PET in Parkinson's disease. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry, 76, 1204–1210. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Cronin‐Golomb, A. (2010). Parkinson's disease as a disconnection syndrome. Neuropsychology Review, 20, 191–208. doi:10.1007/s11065‐010‐9128‐8 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Cubo, E. , Martinez Martín, P. , Martin‐Gonzalez, J. A. , Rodríguez‐Blázquez, C. , & Kulisevsky, J. (2010). Motor laterality asymmetry and nonmotor symptoms in Parkinson's disease. Movement Disorders, 25, 70–75. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Dewey, R. B. , Tajena, A. , McClintock, S. M. , Munro Cullum, C. , Bernstein, I. , & Husain, M. M. (2013). Motor symptoms at onset of Parkinson's disease and risk for cognitive impairment and depression. Cognitive and Behavioral Neurology, 25, 115–120. doi:10.1097/WNN.0b013e31826dfd62 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Donnemiller, E. , Mair, K. J. , Poewe, W. , Scherfler, C. , Seppi, K. , Virgolini, V. , & Wenning, G. K. (2012). Left hemispheric predominance of nigrostriatal dysfunction in Parkinson's disease. Brain, 135, 3348–3354. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Drago, V. , Foster, P. S. , Skidmore, F. M. , & Heilman, K. M. (2009). Creativity in Parkinson's disease as a function of right vs. left hemibody onset. Journal of the Neurological Sciences, 276, 179–183. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Eckblad, M. , & Chapman, L. J. (1983). Magical ideation as an indicator of schizotypy. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 51, 215–225. doi:10.1037/0022‐006X.51.2.215 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Erro, R. , Santangelo, G. , Picillo, M. , Vitale, C. , Amboni, M. , Longo, K. , … Pellecchia, M. T. (2013). Side‐of‐onset does not influence cognition in newly diagnosed untreated Parkinson's disease patients. Parkinsonism and Related Disorders, 19, 256–259. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Fetterman, A. , Ode, S. , & Robinson, M. D. (2013). For which side the bell tolls: The laterality of approach – avoidance associative networks. Motivation and Emotion, 37, 33–38. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Foster, E. R. , Black, K. J. , Antenor‐Dorsey, J. A. , Perlmutter, J. S. , & Hershey, T. (2008). Motor asymmetry and substantia nigra volume are related to spatial delayed response performance in Parkinson disease. Brain and Cognition, 67, 1–10. doi:10.1016/j.bandc.2007.10.002 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Foster, P. S. , Drago, V. , Crucian, G. P. , Sullivan, W. K. , Rhodes, R. D. , Shenal, B. V. , … Heilman, K. M. (2011). Anxiety and depression severity are related to right but not left onset Parkinson's disease duration. Journal of the Neurological Sciences, 305, 131–135. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Foster, P. S. , Drago, V. , Mendez, K. , Witt, J. C. , Crucian, G. P. , & Heilman, K. M. (2013). Mood disturbances and cognitive functioning in Parkinson's disease: The effects of disease duration and side‐of‐onset of motor symptoms. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 35, 71–82. doi:10.1080/13803395.2012.753037 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Foster, P. S. , Drago, V. , Yung, R. C. , Skidmore, F. M. , Skoblar, B. , Shenal, B. V. , … Heilman, K. M. (2010). Anxiety affects working memory only in the left hemibody onset Parkinson disease patients. Cognitive and Behavioral Neurology, 23, 4–18. doi:10.1097/WNN.0b013e3181cc8be9 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Gelman, A. , Hill, J. , & Yajima, M. (2012). Why we (usually) don't have to worry about multiple comparisons. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 5, 189–211. [Google Scholar]
  21. Giaquinto, S. , Bruti, L. , Dall'Armi, V. , Palma, E. , & Spiridigliozzi, C. (2011). Religious and spiritual beliefs in outpatients suffering from Parkinson Disease. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 26, 916–922. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Goldstein, H. (2010). Multilevel statistical models (4th ed.) Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. [Google Scholar]
  23. Henry, J. D. , & Crawford, J. R. (2005). The short‐form version of the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (DASS‐21): Construct validity and normative data in a large non‐clinical sample. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 44, 227–239. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Hoehn, M. , & Yahr, M. (1967). Parkinsonism: Onset, progression and mortality. Neurology, 17, 427–442. doi:10.1212/wnl.17.5.427 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Holdnack, H. A. (2001). Wechsler test of adult reading (WTAR). San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation. [Google Scholar]
  26. Holtgraves, T. , McNamara, P. , Cappaert, K. , & Durso, R. (2010). Linguistic correlates of asymmetric motor symptom severity in Parkinson's disease. Brain and Cognition, 72, 189–196. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Lee, A. C. , Harris, J. P. , & Calvert, J. E. (1998). Impairments of mental rotation in Parkinson's disease. Neuropsychologia, 36, 109–114. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Maier, F. , Prigatano, G. P. , Kalbe, E. , Barbe, M. T. , Eggers, C. , Lewis, C. J. , … Timmermann, L. (2012). Impaired self‐awareness of motor deficits in Parkinson's disease: Association with motor asymmetry and motor phenotypes. Movement Disorders, 27, 1443–1447. doi:10.1002/mds.25088 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Marinus, J. , & van Hilten, J. J. (2015). The significance of motor (a)symmetry in Parkinson's disease. Movement Disorders, 30, 379–385. doi:10.1002/mds.26107 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Munhoz, R. P. , Espay, A. J. , Morgante, F. , Li, J. Y. , Teive, H. A. , Dunn, E. , … Litvan, I. (2013). Long duration Parkinson's disease: Role of lateralization of motor features. Parkinsonism and Related Disorders, 19, 77–80. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Nasreddine, Z. S. , Phillips, N. A. , Bédirian, V. , Charbonneau, S. , Whitehead, V. , Collin, I. , … Chertkow, H. (2005). The Montreal Cognitive Assessment, MoCA: A brief screening tool for mild cognitive impairment. Journal of American Geriatric Society, 53, 695–699. doi:10.1111/j.1532‐5415.2005.53221.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. Nazem, S. , Siderowf, A. D. , Duda, J. E. , Have, T. T. , Colcher, A. , Horn, S. S. , … Weintraub, D. (2009). Montreal cognitive assessment performance in patients with Parkinson's disease with “normal” global cognition according to mini‐mental state examination score. American Geriatric Society, 57, 304–308. doi:10.1111/j.1532‐5415.2008.02096.x [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Norton, D. J. , Jaywant, A. , Gallart‐Palau, X. , & Cronin‐Golomb, A. (2015). Normal discrimination of spatial frequency and contrast across visual hemifields in left‐onset Parkinson's disease: Evidence against perceptual hemifield biases. Vision Research, 107, 94–100. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. Pellicano, C. , Assogna, F. , Cravello, L. , Langella, R. , Caltagirone, C. , Spalletta, G. , & Pontieri, F. E. (2015). Neuropsychiatric and cognitive symptoms and body Side‐of‐onset of parkinsonism in unmedicated Parkinson's disease patients. Parkinsonism and Related Disorders, 21, 1096–1100. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  35. Poletti, M. , Frosini, D. , Pagni, C. , Baldacci, F. , Giuntini, M. , Mazzucchi, S. , … Bonuccelli, U. (2013). The relationship between motor symptom lateralization and cognitive performance in newly diagnosed drug‐naive patients with Parkinson's disease. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 35, 124–131. doi:10.1080/13803395.2012.751966 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  36. Stroop, J. R. (1935). Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 18, 643–662. [Google Scholar]
  37. Tomer, R. , Levin, B. E. , & Weiner, W. J. (1993). Side‐of‐onset of motor symptoms influences cognition in Parkinson's disease. Annals of Neurology, 34, 579–584. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  38. Tomlinson, C. L. , Stowe, R. , Patel, S. , Rick, C. , Gray, R. , & Clarke, C. E. (2010). Systematic review of levodopa dose equivalency reporting in Parkinson's disease. Movement Disorder, 25, 2649–2653. doi:10.1002/mds.23429 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  39. Ventura, M. I. , Baynes, K. , Sigvardt, K. A. , Unruh, A. M. , Acklin, S. S. , Kirsch, H. E. , & Disbrow, E. A. (2012). Hemispheric asymmetries and prosodic emotion recognition deficits in Parkinson's disease. Neuropsychologia, 50, 1936–1945. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  40. Verreyt, N. , Nys, G. M. S. , Santens, P. , & Vingerhoets, G. (2011). Cognitive differences between patients with left‐sided and right‐sided Parkinson's disease. Neuropsychology Review, 21, 405–424. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  41. Wechsler, D. (1997). Wechsler memory scale‐ third edition. San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation. [Google Scholar]
  42. Wechsler, D. (2008). Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale– IV (WAIS–IV). San Antonio, TX: NCS Pearson. [Google Scholar]

Articles from Brain and Behavior are provided here courtesy of Wiley

RESOURCES