<scp>N</scp>omenclature of genetic movement disorders: <scp>R</scp>ecommendations of the international <scp>P</scp>arkinson and movement disorder society task force
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The system of assigning locus symbols to specify chromosomal regions that are associated with a familial disorder has a number of problems when used as a reference list of genetically determined disorders,including (I) erroneously assigned loci, (II) duplicated loci, (III) missing symbols or loci, (IV) unconfirmed loci and genes, (V) a combination of causative genes and risk factor genes in the same list, and (VI) discordance between phenotype and list assignment. In this article, we report on the recommendations of the International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society Task Force for Nomenclature of Genetic Movement Disorders and present a system for naming genetically determined movement disorders that addresses these problems. We demonstrate how the system would be applied to currently known genetically determined parkinsonism, dystonia, dominantly inherited ataxia, spastic paraparesis, chorea, paroxysmal movement disorders, neurodegeneration with brain iron accumulation, and primary familial brain calcifications. This system provides a resource for clinicians and researchers that, unlike the previous system, can be considered an accurate and criterion-based list of confirmed genetically determined movement disorders at the time it was last updated.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.022 | 0.015 |
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".