MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2164728327 · doi:10.1109/iembs.2011.6090067

Variability of hand tremor in rest and in posture — A pilot study

2011· article· en· W2164728327 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Fariborz Rahimi, Carina Bee, Angela South, Derek Debicki, Mandar Jog

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeurological disorders and treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersLondon Health Sciences CentreNational Parkinson Foundation
KeywordsEssential tremorPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPostural tremorMedicineParkinson's diseaseKinematicsBotulinum neurotoxinPhysical therapyAudiologyDiseaseInternal medicineBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Previous, studies have demonstrated variability in the frequency and amplitude in tremor between subjects and between trials in both healthy individuals and those with disease states. However, to date, few studies have examined the composition of tremor. Efficacy of treatment for tremor using techniques such as Botulinum neurotoxin type A (BoNT A) injection may benefit from a better understanding of tremor variability, but more importantly, tremor composition. In the present study, we evaluated tremor variability and composition in 8 participants with either essential tremor or Parkinson disease tremor using kinematic recording methods. Our preliminary findings suggest that while individual patients may have more intra-trial and intra-task variability, overall, task effect was significant only for amplitude of tremor. Composition of tremor varied among patients and the data suggest that tremor composition is complex involving multiple muscle groups. These results may support the value of kinematic assessment methods and the improved understanding of tremor composition in the management of tremor.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.086
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations12
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNeurological disorders and treatments→French-language works237,207→