Psychiatric comorbidities in dystonia: Emerging concepts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Psychiatric disorders are highly prevalent in patients with dystonia and have a profound effect on quality of life. Patients with dystonia frequently meet criteria for anxiety disorders, especially social phobia, and major depressive disorder. Deficits in emotional processing have also been demonstrated in some dystonia populations. Onset of psychiatric disturbances in patients with dystonia often precedes onset of motor symptoms, suggesting that the pathophysiology of dystonia itself contributes to the genesis of psychiatric disturbances. This article examines the hypothesis that mood and anxiety disorders are intrinsic to the neurobiology of dystonia, citing the available literature, which is derived mostly from research on focal isolated dystonias. Limitations of studies are identified, and the role of emotional reactivity, especially in the context of pain secondary to dystonia, is recognized. Available evidence underscores the need to develop dystonia assessment tools that incorporate psychiatric measures. Such tools would allow for a better understanding of the full spectrum of dystonia presentations and facilitate research on the treatment of dystonia as well as the treatment of psychiatric illnesses in the context of dystonia. This article, solicited for a special Movement Disorders issue on novel research findings and emerging concepts in dystonia, addresses the following issues: (1) To what extent are psychiatric disturbances related to the pathophysiology of dystonia? (2) What is the impact of psychiatric disturbances on outcome measures of current assessment tools for dystonia? (3) How do psychiatric comorbidities influence the treatment of dystonia? Answers to these questions will lead to an increased appreciation of psychiatric disorders in dystonia, a better understanding of brain physiology, more nuanced research questions pertaining to this population, better clinical scales that can be used to further patient management and research, and improved patient outcomes. © 2013 Movement Disorder Society.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".