The clinical and neuroimaging studies in Holmes tremor
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Gajos A, Bogucki A, Schinwelski M, Sołtan W, Rudzińska M, Budrewicz S, Koszewicz M, Majos A, Górska-Chrząstek M, Bieńkiewicz M, Kuśmierek J, Sławek J. The clinical and neuroimaging studies in Holmes tremor.Acta Neurol Scand: 2010: 122: 360–366.© 2010 The Authors Journal compilation © 2010 Blackwell Munksgaard. Aim – Holmes tremor (HT) is a combination of rest, postural and action tremor. A parallel dysfunction of cerebello-thalamic and nigrostriatal pathways seems necessary to produce this kind of tremor. We present the clinical and neuroimaging study verifying that hypothesis. Material and methods – A total of 10 patients: five male, five female, fulfilling consensus criteria were included. Demographic, clinical and neuroimaging data (MRI = 9; CT = 1, SPECT with the use of 123-I-FP CIT: DaTSCAN in six patients to assess the presynaptic dopaminergic nigrostriatal system involvement, indices of asymmetry for ligand uptake for each striatum were calculated) were analyzed. Results – Hemorrhage was the most frequent etiology and thalamus – the most commonly involved structure. Contrary to the previous reports, the visual assessment did not reveal remarkable interhemispheric differences of DaTSCAN uptake. Quantitative measurements showed only minimal differences. Conclusions – It is open to debate whether nigrostriatal pathway damage is crucial for the phenomenology of HT. Alternative hypothesis is presented that HT represents the heterogeneous spectrum of tremors with similar phenomenology, but different pathophysiology.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".