Sublingual Atropine for sialorrhea secondary to parkinsonism: A pilot study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sialorrhea is a relatively common symptom in idiopathic Parkinson's disease and related conditions for which most of the accepted treatments are either highly invasive or may cause substantial systemic side effects. This study describes an open-label pilot study of sublingual atropine drops for the treatment of sialorrhea in 7 patients (6 with Parkinson's disease, 1 with progressive supranuclear palsy). Participants demonstrated statistically significant declines in saliva production, both objectively and subjectively. Self-reported drooling severity showed a significant decline between baseline and 180 minutes, t(6) = 3.240 P < 0.025 (eta(2) = 0.636), and between baseline and 1 week, t(6) = 4.583 P < 0.005 (eta(2) = 0.778). Objectively measured saliva production decreased significantly between baseline and the 1-week follow-up, t(6) = 2.711 P < 0.05 (eta(2) = 0.551). Delirium occurred in 1 patient (concurrent with a urinary tract infection), and 2 patients experienced worsening of hallucinations (active hallucinosis was concealed by both individuals to allow participation in the trial). The remaining trial participants did not experience any anticholinergic side effects. This trial shows that, in selected patient populations, sublingual atropine is a simple and inexpensive treatment for sialorrhea associated with parkinsonism.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".