MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2068015916 · doi:10.1001/archneur.61.5.754

Dementia-Like Presentation of Striatal Hypermetabolic State With Antistriatal Antibodies Responsive to Steroids

2004· article· en· W2068015916 on OpenAlexaff
Gabriel C. Léger, Nancy Johnson, Sandra W. Horowitz, Russell C. Dale, Andrew J. Church, Marsel Mesulam

Bibliographic record

VenueArchives of Neurology · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAutoimmune Neurological Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDementiaMedicineChoreaPositron emission tomographyPathologyPsychologyInternal medicineNuclear medicineDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Hypermetabolic lesions of the striatum are rare. They usually involve autoimmunity and are associated with choreatic disorders such as Sydenham chorea, lupus, and the antiphospholipid antibody syndrome. PATIENT: A 48-year-old woman was initially seen with a 1-year history of progressive changes in personality and attention. There were minor associated involuntary movements. Negative routine investigation results, including regular autoimmune serologies and magnetic resonance imaging, led to the diagnosis of a frontal dementia. Positron emission tomographic results demonstrated hypermetabolism in the left striatum. Western blot technique results demonstrated plasma antistriatal antibodies. Treatment with corticosteroids induced a resolution of her attentional deficits and a return of her personality to its premorbid state. The repeated positron emission tomographic scan results were near normal, and the titer of antistriatal antibodies was significantly reduced. CONCLUSION: Autoimmune striatal dysfunction can initially appear with a clinical picture suggestive of a degenerative dementia. Recognition of the underlying etiology and treatment was possible because of abnormalities uncovered on positron emission tomographic images.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.297
Threshold uncertainty score0.444

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.253 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations12
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchives of NeurologySame topicAutoimmune Neurological Disorders and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207