Restless Legs Syndrome in Children: A Review and Update on Pharmacological Options
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Restless legs syndrome (RLS), formally identified and described by Ekbom in the 1940s, is a common clinical disorder, characterized by an overwhelming urge to move the legs, often accompanied by uncomfortable and unpleasant sensations. This impulse can also be present in the upper limbs or other parts of the body. Well recognized in the adult population, the symptoms associated with this condition have commonly been reported to originate in childhood. However, identifying prospectively children suffering from RLS is still a challenging issue. Iron deficiency has been recognized as a feature frequently associated with RLS. Some authors also make a connection with the deficiency, RLS and other common problems encountered in children, such as attention deficit disorder with hyperactivity (ADHD). Linkage to different chromosomal loci has been achieved in recent genetic studies of large kindred, as well as identification of specific genes. Therapeutic considerations in children range from providing sound sleep hygiene to intervening pharmacologically. In that regard, use of iron supplements, dopaminergic stimulation, anticonvulsants, opiates, and benzodiazepines will be assessed along with newer options, such as rotigotine and gabapentin enacarbil. Considerations specific to childhood do apply, as no pharmacological therapy for restless legs syndrome have been approved by the Federal Drug Administration (FDA) in individuals of the pediatric age group.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
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".