Cortical and spinal abnormalities in psychogenic dystonia
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
OBJECTIVE: The pathophysiology of psychogenic dystonia has not been examined, but a growing body of literature suggests that abnormal sensory input from repetitive movements can lead to plastic cortical changes. Reduced cortical and spinal inhibition is well documented in organic dystonia. We tested the hypothesis that aberrant sensory input associated with abnormal posture may cause similar abnormalities by testing patients with psychogenic dystonia. METHODS: We assessed cortical and spinal inhibitory circuits and cortical activity associated with voluntary movement in 10 patients with clinically definite psychogenic dystonia, 8 patients with organic dystonia, and 12 age-matched healthy control subjects. RESULTS: Three measures of cortical inhibition, resting short- and long-interval intracortical inhibition and cortical silent period, were reduced in both psychogenic dystonia and organic dystonia. Cutaneous silent period mediated by spinal circuitries was increased in psychogenic and organic dystonia. Forearm spinal reciprocal inhibition was reduced in psychogenic dystonia. INTERPRETATION: Psychogenic and organic dystonia share similar physiological abnormalities. Previous findings of abnormal cortical and spinal excitability in organic dystonia may, in part, be a consequence rather than a cause of dystonia. Alternatively, these findings may represent endophenotypic abnormalities that predispose to both types of dystonia.
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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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