F11 Self-awareness of involuntary movements and daily living disability in huntington's disease in comparison to Parkinson's disease and cervical dystonia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Involuntary movements are one of the features of Huntington9s disease (HD), Parkinson9s disease (PD) and cervical dystonia (CD). Self-awareness of symptoms is overally deficient in HD, while in PD poor self-awareness of symptoms is related to dementia. Self-awareness of symptoms in CD is supposed to be preserved. Previous studies assessing self-awareness of chorea used questionnaire format, which may be prone to misunderstandings. Aims The study aimed at assessing self-awareness of motor and daily disability in HD, PD with (PDdys) and without dyskinesias (PDndys) and in cervical dystonia (CD). Self-awareness was assessed by comparing patient9s and caregiver9s ratings and by correlating them with objective results. Film materials were used to depict specific motor symptoms. Methods/techniques Eighty-nine patients scoring at least 20 in Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) participated in the study (23 with HD, 25 PD with PDdys, 21 with PDndys and 20 with CD). Neurological examination comprised of Unified Huntington9s Disease Rating Scale (UHDRS) for HD, Unified Parkinson9s Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) part II-IV for PD and Toronto Western Spasmodic Torticollis Rating Scale (TWSTRS) for CD. Questionnaires filled in by the patient and his/her caregiver included: Self-Assessment Parkinson9s Disease Disability Scale and a scale based on a series of 15 films demonstrating different motor symptoms (5 UHDRS, 5 UPDRS and 5 from TWSTRS). Results/outcome HD patients overall underestimated their dysfunctions. PDdys patients both underestimated and overestimated certain aspects of motor symptoms and dysfunction in daily activities. PDndys and CD patients demonstrated better self-awareness of symptoms. Conclusions Deficits in the self-awareness of symptoms are more generalised in HD than in PD, regardless of the cognitive status.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".