MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2171539472 · doi:10.3109/00207454.2012.668727

Patient Perception of Levido Reticularis due to Amantadine

2012· article· en· W2171539472 on OpenAlexaff
Abdul Qayyum Rana, Mohamed Sufian Masroor

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Neuroscience · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicParkinson's Disease Mechanisms and Treatments
Canadian institutionsParkinson's Clinic of Eastern Toronto & Movement Disorders Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAmantadineRashLivedo reticularisMedicinePerceptionDiseaseDermatologyPsychologyInternal medicinePharmacologyNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Livedo reticularis (LR) is a "fish-net like" mottling of the skin, and is attributed to a variety of factors. Amantadine, a medication used in Parkinson's disease, has been known to cause LR localized to the lower, and to a rarer extent, the upper extremities. Patient perception of this condition has been severely under-reported and can impact the patient's decision to stop this medication. In this retrospective study, we analyze the perception of five patients presenting with LR and their decision to continue on amantadine. It was seen that patients with the reticularis rash localized in the upper extremities, in addition to the lower extremities, were affected enough to discontinue amantadine despite its useful therapeutic effects. It is imperative that patient perception regarding LR be taken into consideration when initially presented. Furthermore, the decision to change the regiment of amantadine should be individualized according to patient condition and perception of presented rash.

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)0.000
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: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.287 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations9
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of NeuroscienceSame topicParkinson's Disease Mechanisms and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207