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
Levodopa-induced dyskinesias (LID) are common and difficult to treat. This review focuses on three issues related to LID: clinical features, classification and rating, pathophysiology and pathogenesis, and management. The three primary clinical syndromes are OFF-period dystonia, peak-dose dyskinesia, and diphasic dyskinesia. Several other forms also occur, making the evaluation and choice of treatment complicated. A core component of the pathophysiology of LID is overactivity of the direct striatal output pathway. This pathway provides a direct GABAergic connection by which the striatum inhibits the output regions of the basal ganglia, i.e., the internal globus pallidus and the substantia nigra pars reticulata. Altering dopaminergic dosing and timing can abate dyskinesias, but usually impact the control of parkinsonism. Putative therapies to reduce the problem of dyskinesias could focus on the glutamatergic, GABAergic, alpha2 adrenergic, serotonergic (5HT1A, 5HT2A), opioid, histamine H3, adenosine A2A receptors, the monoamine transport or cannabinoid CB1 receptors systems. The only currently available drug with an evidence-based recommendation on efficacy for dyskinesia is amantadine. Therapy goals include the prevention of dyskinesia and treatment of dyskinesias that are troublesome clinically. New rating measures to assess severity and disability related to dyskinesia are in the process of development and clinimetric testing.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 it