The physical, social and emotional aspects are the most affected in the quality of life of the patients with cervical dystonia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Describe the functional, clinical and quality of life (QoL) profiles in patients with cervical dystonia (CD) with residual effect or without effect of botulinum toxin (BTX), as well as verify the existence of correlation between the level of motor impairment, pain and QoL. METHOD: Seventy patients were assessed through the Craniocervical dystonia questionnaire-24 (CDQ-24) and the Toronto Western Spasmodic Torticollis Rating Scale (TWSTRS). RESULTS: The greater the disability, pain and severity of dystonia, the worse the QoL (p<0.0001). Greater severity relates to greater disability (p<0.0001). Pain was present in 84% of the sample, being source of disability in 41%. The most frequent complaints were: difficulty in keeping up with professional and personal demands (74.3%), feeling uneasy in public (72.9%), hindered by pain (68.6%), depressed, annoyed or bitter (47.1%), lonely or isolated (32.9%). CONCLUSION: The physical, social and emotional aspects are the most affected in the QoL of these patients.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".