Effects of physical activity on the symptoms of Tourette syndrome: A systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is irrefutable evidence that routine physical activity or exercise can offer considerable health benefits to individuals living with various mental disorders. However, it is not clear what effect physical activity has on the symptoms of Tourette syndrome. Despite a paucity of evidence, physical activity or exercise has already been recommended by various health organizations for the management of tics. We provide a systematic review of the effects of physical activity or exercise on tic symptomology in individuals with Tourette syndrome. Major electronic databases were searched for all available publications before August 2017. Keywords and MeSH terms included "physical activity" or "exercise" or "exercise therapy" or "physical exertion" or "sports" and "tics" or "tic disorders" or "Tourette." Eight studies were included, the majority of which were case reports. Despite a number of methodological limitations of the included studies, the review points to a trend that the effects of acute physical activity are intensity-dependent, where light intensity may alleviate and vigorous intensity may exacerbate tics. Chronic physical activity, however, appears to reduce the severity of tics even at higher intensity. Several physiological mechanisms may explain the differential effects of acute and chronic physical activity in Tourette syndrome. Future randomized controlled studies should better characterize the effects of different intensities and types of physical activity in Tourette syndrome.
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 | 0.003 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".