A multicenter randomized placebo‐controlled clinical trial of pramipexole for Tourette's syndrome
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Dopamine agonists could theoretically normalize the suspected central dopamine hypersensitivity in Tourette's syndrome. METHODS: There was a multicenter randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind clinical trial of pramipexole given for 6 weeks in 63 children and adolescents with Tourette's syndrome. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in the adjusted mean change in the Total Tic Score of the Yale Global Tic Severity Scale for patients treated with pramipexole (-7.16) and placebo (-7.17). There were no significant treatment effects on change from baseline in the Global Severity score of the Yale Scale and parent- and investigator-scored Clinical Global Impression of Improvement. In patients with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, there was improvement in DuPaul ADHD scale scores for patients receiving pramipexole compared with placebo. CONCLUSIONS: There was no evidence that pramipexole has efficacy in suppressing tics. Pramipexole may decrease symptoms of associated attention deficit hyperactivity disorder.
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.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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 it