Conversion sensory symptoms associated with parietal lobe infarct: case report, diagnostic issues and brain mechanisms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This case report suggests that diagnostic difficulties and brain mechanisms related to conversion disorder associated with cerebral lesions differ from those related to conversion disorder without cerebral lesions. A 35-year-old divorced woman was admitted to a psychiatric inpatient unit with multiple physical complaints. The symptoms first appeared 5 years previous and 2 months after a sexual assault. Three years later, she began to experience ill-defined sensory symptoms confined to the left half of her body (splitting the midline). Results of neurologic consultations were equivocal because of the subjective nature of the complaints, which were viewed as conversion symptoms. A magnetic resonance imaging scan demonstrated an old infarct in the right parietal lobe, suggesting a physical origin of the patient's symptoms. However, normal somatosensory-evoked responses from the affected area contributed little to establishing the diagnosis. The results of all further investigations to identify causes of the vascular pathology were negative. The multiple ill-defined somatic symptoms, the distribution of sensory symptoms and the resolution of symptoms with psychotherapy established the diagnosis of conversion disorder superimposed on a pre-existing right parietal lesion. This case highlights the importance of clinical features in establishing a diagnosis such as this. We suggest that reactivation of implicit sensory memories (represented at the thalamic level and resulting from decreased corticofugal inhibitions due to the lesion) may contribute to the formation of sensory conversion symptoms in individuals with parietal lobe lesions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".