Diagnostic indicators of restless legs syndrome in primary care consultations: The DESYR study
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study is to determine whether spontaneous complaints about sleep or the legs could be used as potential indicators of restless legs syndrome (RLS) in primary care. A total of 351 general practitioners participated in the study. In a first historical patient identification phase, all patients with spontaneous complaints of sleep or leg symptoms over the previous year were identified. A control group without such complaints was identified. In a second prospective data collection phase, those who consulted a participating physician were interviewed to assess consensus diagnostic criteria of RLS. Severity was assessed with the International Restless Legs Syndrome Study Group severity rating scale. Of 1,405,823 patients consulting during the historical phase, a leg complaint was reported in 61,685 and a sleep complaint in 40,568. A total of 1,432 consulted during the prospective phase. A diagnosis of RLS was assigned to 42.6% of patients with leg complaints, 35.5% of those with sleep complaints, 54.9% of those with both complaints, and 12.9% of those with no complaints. Median RLS severity scores were 18.8 to 20.4. A total of 63.7% of patients were prescribed a venotonic, 43.7% a hypnotic, and 41.5% an anxiolytic. Complaints of sleep or leg symptoms are frequently associated with a diagnosis of RLS, and their presence should alert the physician to the possibility of a differential diagnosis of RLS.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it