MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2131134103 · doi:10.1002/mds.25475

Phenomenology and classification of dystonia: A consensus update

2013· review· en· W2131134103 on OpenAlexaff
Alberto Albanese, Kailash P. Bhatia, Susan Bressman, Mahlon R. DeLong, Stanley Fahn, Victor S.C. Fung, Mark Hallett, Joseph Jankovic, Hyder A. Jinnah, Christine Klein, Anthony E. Lang, Jonathan W. Mink, Jan K. Teller

Bibliographic record

VenueMovement Disorders · 2013
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBotulinum Toxin and Related Neurological Disorders
Canadian institutionsToronto Western HospitalUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsDystoniaMovement disordersPhysical medicine and rehabilitationNeurological disorderEtiologyDeep brain stimulationPsychologyFocal dystoniaEssential tremorMedicineNeurosciencePsychiatryPathologyDiseaseCentral nervous system diseaseParkinson's disease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This report describes the consensus outcome of an international panel consisting of investigators with years of experience in this field that reviewed the definition and classification of dystonia. Agreement was obtained based on a consensus development methodology during 3 in-person meetings and manuscript review by mail. Dystonia is defined as a movement disorder characterized by sustained or intermittent muscle contractions causing abnormal, often repetitive, movements, postures, or both. Dystonic movements are typically patterned and twisting, and may be tremulous. Dystonia is often initiated or worsened by voluntary action and associated with overflow muscle activation. Dystonia is classified along 2 axes: clinical characteristics, including age at onset, body distribution, temporal pattern and associated features (additional movement disorders or neurological features); and etiology, which includes nervous system pathology and inheritance. The clinical characteristics fall into several specific dystonia syndromes that help to guide diagnosis and treatment. We provide here a new general definition of dystonia and propose a new classification. We encourage clinicians and researchers to use these innovative definition and classification and test them in the clinical setting on a variety of patients with dystonia. © 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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.070

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.002
Bibliometrics0.0100.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.006
Open science0.0060.002
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.048
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.267 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations2,247
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMovement DisordersSame topicBotulinum Toxin and Related Neurological DisordersFrench-language works237,207