Dysfunction in emotion processing underlies functional (psychogenic) dystonia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: We sought to determine whether abnormalities in emotion processing underlie functional (psychogenic) dystonia, one of the most common functional movement disorders. METHODS: Motor and emotion circuits were examined in 12 participants with functional dystonia, 12 with primary organic dystonia, and 25 healthy controls using functional magnetic resonance imaging at 4T and a finger-tapping task (motor task), a basic emotion-recognition task (emotional faces task), and an intense-emotion stimuli task. RESULTS: There were no differences in motor task activation between groups. In the faces task, when compared with the other groups, functional dystonia patients showed areas of decreased activation in the right middle temporal gyrus and bilateral precuneus and increased activation in the right inferior frontal gyrus, bilateral occipital cortex and fusiform gyrus, and bilateral cerebellum. In the intense-emotion task, when compared with the other groups, functional dystonia patients showed decreased activation in the left insular and left motor cortices (compared to organic dystonia, they showed an additional decrease in activation in the right opercular cortex and right motor cortex) and increased activation in the left fusiform gyrus. CONCLUSIONS: Functional dystonia patients exhibited stimulus-dependent altered activation in networks involved in motor preparation and execution, spatial cognition, and attentional control. These results support the presence of network dysfunction in functional dystonia. © 2017 International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".