Tourette Syndrome and the Spectrum of Neurodevelopmental Tic Disorders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The first report of a tic disorder was made as early as in 1825 by Jean Marc Gaspard Itard, a French neurologist. He described the case of a French noblewoman, Marquise de Dampierre, who displayed involuntary movements and coprolalia. At the end of the nineteenth century, Armand Trousseau and Georges Gilles de la Tourette published a more complete description of the disorder [1, 2]. In his paper, Gilles de la Tourette described the symptomatology of 9 patients with multiple tics, echolalia, and coprolalia and suggested that it was a neurological condition with a hereditary component. Nevertheless, this syndrome was later considered to be primarily psychogenic in origin, and it is only since the 1960s, with the use of neuroleptics, that the organic basis of Gilles de la Tourette syndrome (TS) has been reaffirmed. TS is now considered a hereditary neuropsychiatric disorder linked to corticostriatal brain circuits. These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".