Brain-Behavior Relations During Motor Processing in Chronic Tic and Habit Disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study examined electrophysiological indices of preparation (readiness potential, RP) and execution (movement-associated potential, MAP) during automated and controlled reaction time (RT) in 13 chronic tic disorder, 17 habit disorder, and 14 control participants. BACKGROUND: Both tic and habit disorders are hypothesized to involve states of heightened activation, which could impede initiation and the control of complex motor actions. METHOD: The electrophysiological signal was recorded from 4 electrodes (Fz, C3, C4, Pz) during a fixed 4-second foreperiod reaction time task. RESULTS: During automated responses, controls showed a shorter RP peak onset, and during controlled responses a longer MAP peak onset, compared with both clinical groups. The controls were the only group who showed a consistent linear relationship between RP and RT. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with chronic tic as well as habit disorder may not modulate cortical activation optimally in planning and executing both automated and controlled responses.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".