Le Heron · Brain : a journal of neurology 2018 · controlled repeated-measures study · n=71

Distinct effects of apathy and dopamine on effort-based decision-making in Parkinson's disease.

Cited 180 times in the scientific literature.

Level 3 - non-randomized controlled study

Controlled non-randomized repeated-measures study comparing patients ON and OFF medication alongside matched healthy controls

PubMed 29672668 · doi:10.1093/brain/awy110 · record verified 2026-08-26

What was done

Researchers evaluated effort-based decision-making in 39 patients with Parkinson's disease (with and without clinical apathy, assessed via the Lille Apathy Rating Scale) and 32 age- and gender-matched healthy controls. Patients were tested across two separate sessions: ON and OFF their standard dopaminergic medications. Participants decided trial-by-trial whether to accept or reject monetary reward offers requiring varying levels of physical effort via calibrated handheld dynamometers. Primary outcomes were choice acceptance (analyzed with hierarchical generalized linear mixed effects models) and squeeze vigor (force in Newtons exerted above required threshold).

What was found

The abstract does not report numerical values, confidence intervals, or exact statistics. Both clinical apathy and dopamine depletion were associated with reduced offer acceptance, but through distinct behavioral patterns. Apathy was characterized by increased rejection of predominantly low-reward offers. In contrast, dopamine increased acceptance of high-effort, high-reward offers regardless of underlying motivational state. Dopamine also exerted a main effect on motor vigor by increasing force production independently of reward, whereas apathy did not affect motor vigor.

Why it matters

The study shows that apathy in Parkinson's disease is related to blunted reward incentivization rather than pure dopamine deficiency. This provides a mechanistic explanation for why dopaminergic therapies may not resolve clinical apathy, highlighting the need for non-dopaminergic treatment targets.

Limits

The abstract provides no raw numerical estimates, effect sizes, or p-values. The sample size is modest (39 patients split into apathetic and non-apathetic groups, 32 controls). The abstract does not specify whether testing order (ON vs. OFF medication) was randomized or counterbalanced. The physical grip task may not reflect non-physical aspects of effort and motivation in daily life.

Cited by