MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2770546158 · doi:10.1136/jnnp-2017-317298

Compulsive sexual behaviour in Parkinson’s disease is associated with higher doses of levodopa

2017· letter· en· W2770546158 on OpenAlexaff
Pedro Barbosa, Talyta Grippe, Andrew J. Lees, Sean O’Sullivan, Atbin Djamshidian, Thomas T. Warner

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurology Neurosurgery & Psychiatry · 2017
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicObsessive-Compulsive Spectrum Disorders
Canadian institutionsCentre for Movement Disorders
FundersMedical Research Council
KeywordsLevodopaParkinson's diseaseNeurologyMedicineDopaminergicDiseaseNeurosurgeryPsychologyPsychiatryInternal medicineDopamine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Previous research estimates the lifetime prevalence of compulsive sexual behaviour (CSB) in individuals with Parkinson’s disease (PD) to be 2.7%. CSB has also been associated with male gender and earlier onset of PD.1 Although both dopamine agonists (DAs) and, to a lesser extent, levodopa have been associated with impulsive compulsive behaviours (ICBs),2 it is still unclear whether higher levodopa doses are a risk factor for the development of CSB in patients with PD. Patients with ICBs were identified from a database of individuals with PD and ICBs who were seen at the National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery, Queen Square, London, UK, and who had participated in three previous research projects over an 8-year period (from 2008 to 2016). All the ICB cases were recruited to research studies from PD clinics at the National Hospital and selected due to the reporting of ICBs. All cases underwent a thorough clinical investigation as well as a detailed semistructured interview conducted by one of the authors. Hospital notes were reviewed by a movement disorder specialist (PMB) for clinical and demographic data. Levodopa equivalent daily dose (LEDD) was calculated according to previously published guidelines.3 Data were analysed using the software SPSS V.24. In total, 128 patients with PD and ICBs were identified. Seventeen cases were excluded because data on dopaminergic treatment when the ICB was most active were incomplete. The remaining 111 patients were included in the analysis. Nearly 75% of the …

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.262 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Neurology Neurosurgery & PsychiatrySame topicObsessive-Compulsive Spectrum DisordersFrench-language works237,207