Periodic leg movements in REM sleep behavior disorder and related autonomic and EEG activation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess the frequency of periodic leg movements (PLM) in idiopathic REM sleep behavior disorder (RBD) and to analyze their polysomnographic characteristics and associated autonomic and cortical activation. BACKGROUND: PLM during sleep (PLMS) and wakefulness (PLMW) are typical features of restless legs syndrome (RLS), but are also frequently observed in patients with RBD. METHODS: Forty patients with idiopathic RBD underwent one night of polysomnographic recording to assess PLMS frequency. PLM features, PLMS-related cardiac activation during stage 2 sleep, and EEG changes were analyzed in 15 of these patients with RBD. Results were compared with similar data obtained in 15 sex- and age-matched patients with primary RLS. RESULTS: Twenty-eight (70%) of 40 patients with RBD showed a PLMS index greater than 10. No between-group differences were found in sleep architecture or indexes of PLMW and PLMS during non-REM sleep, but a trend for a higher PLMS index during REM sleep was found in patients with RBD. PLM mean duration and interval in the two conditions were similar. A transient tachycardia followed by a bradycardia was observed in close association with every PLMS in both groups, but the amplitude of the cardiac activation was significantly reduced in patients with RBD. In addition, significantly fewer PLMS were associated with microarousal in this condition. CONCLUSIONS: Periodic leg movements are very common in idiopathic RBD, occurring in all stages of sleep, especially during REM sleep. In idiopathic RBD, the reduction of cardiac and EEG activation associated with PLMS suggests the presence of an impaired autonomic and cortical reactivity to internal stimuli.
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) | 0.001 | 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".