Psychosocial outcome and psychiatric comorbidity in older adolescents with Tourette syndrome: controlled study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Children with Tourette syndrome generally experience improvement of tics by age 18 years, but psychosocial and comorbidity outcomes at this age are unclear. AIMS: To compare psychosocial outcomes and lifetime comorbidity rates in older adolescents with Tourette syndrome and controls. We hypothesised a priori that individuals with Tourette syndrome would have lower Children's Global Assessment Scale (CGAS) scores. METHOD: A total of 65 individuals with Tourette syndrome, identified in childhood, and 65 matched community controls without tic or obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) symptoms were assessed around 18 years of age regarding psychosocial functioning and lifetime psychiatric disorders. RESULTS: Compared with controls, individuals with Tourette syndrome had substantially lower CGAS scores (P = 10(-8)) and higher rates of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), major depression, learning disorder and conduct disorder (P< or =0.01). In the participants with Tourette syndrome, poorer psychosocial outcomes were associated with greater ADHD, OCD and tic severity. CONCLUSIONS: Clinically ascertained children with Tourette syndrome typically have impaired psychosocial functioning and high comorbidity rates in late adolescence.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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".