MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2799492510 · doi:10.1093/sleep/zsy061.1020

1021 Cognitive, Motor, and Autonomic Function Impairments in Idiopathic REM Sleep Behavior Disorder

2018· article· en· W2799492510 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Luke Teigen, Angelica Boeve, John Feemster, Paul Timm, D. Sandness, E J Duwell, N Commers, Siri V. McCord, Stuart J. McCarter, Mithri R. Junna, Melissa C. Lipford, Maja Tippmann‐Peikert, Bradley F. Boeve, Michael H. Silber, Erik K. St. Louis

Bibliographic record

VenueSLEEP · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicSleep and Wakefulness Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsREM sleep behavior disorderOrthostatic vital signsMontreal Cognitive AssessmentPsychologyDementia with Lewy bodiesDementiaCohortNeurocognitiveMedicineBlood pressureAudiologyParkinson's diseaseCognitionPhysical therapyPediatricsPsychiatryInternal medicineDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The majority of patients with idiopathic REM sleep behavior disorder (iRBD) are thought to have prodromal synucleinopathy. 25–60% of iRBD patients have olfactory, orthostatic blood pressure, cognitive, or motor impairments suggestive of underlying neurodegeneration. We describe objective measure impairments in the Mayo Clinic iRBD registry cohort at baseline and one-year follow-up. We included adults diagnosed with iRBD by ICSD-3 criteria, and excluded symptomatic RBD patients with mild cognitive impairment, dementia with Lewy bodies, Parkinson disease, or multiple system atrophy. We considered clinical measures as abnormal when subjects met age-sex defined cut-offs for the brief Smell Identification Test (B-SIT) and neurocognitive assessments (Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), Kokmen Short Test of Mental Status (STMS), and King-Devick Test (KDT)), orthostatic systolic blood pressure (SBP) drop ≥ 10 mm Hg, or timed up and go (TUG) speed > 7.5 seconds. 59 iRBD subjects participated, with 24 (40.7%) having one-year follow-up. Mean age at baseline was 65.8 (range 21–84) years, and 18 (30.5%) were women. Dream enactment symptom duration was 9.85 ± 13.01 years. 26 (44.1%) were receiving antidepressant medications. Mean (range) measure scores were: B-SIT 8.7 (2–12); MoCA, 26.4 (20–30); STMS, 34.7 (27–38); KDT, 58.4 (39.2–125.6); SBP drop, 15.3 (1–49); and TUG, 8.3 (5.3–12.8) seconds. Patients with abnormal baseline measures included: B-SIT, 24 (33.9%); MoCA, 20 (33.4%); STMS, 2 (3.4%); KDT, 19 (32.2%); SBP drop, 24 (41.4%); and TUG, 39 (69.6%). At least one baseline measure was abnormal in 54 (91.5%) patients, and two or more in 37 (62.7%). There were no significant differences in measures for patients receiving antidepressant medications at baseline, or for serial measures at one-year follow-up. 91.5% of iRBD patients had impairment in at least one baseline characteristic of underlying prodromal synucleinopathy. Further longitudinal analyses of this cohort compared to matched controls is planned. Mayo Clinic CCaTS.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.341
Threshold uncertainty score0.698

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSLEEPSame topicSleep and Wakefulness ResearchFrench-language works237,207