MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2810556717 · doi:10.1097/wco.0000000000000577

Myoclonus-dystonia: classification, phenomenology, pathogenesis, and treatment

2018· review· en· W2810556717 on OpenAlexaff
Emmanuel Roze, Anthony E. Lang, Marie Vidailhet

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Opinion in Neurology · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeurological disorders and treatments
Canadian institutionsToronto Western HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDystoniaMyoclonusNeuroscienceMedicineMovement disordersPathogenesisDeep brain stimulationPsychologyPathologyDiseaseParkinson's disease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The present study will highlight recent advances in the field of myoclonus-dystonia with a focus on clinical aspects, pathogenesis, and treatment. We will also discuss genetics, classification issues, and diagnostic criteria. RECENT FINDINGS: Myoclonus-dystonia is a clinical syndrome corresponding to the phenotype linked to SGCE, the main causative gene. Childhood-onset myoclonus that predominates over dystonia with prominent upper body involvement, an absence of truncal dystonia, associated anxiety or compulsivity, and a positive family history are helpful diagnostic clues. Recent studies demonstrated that zonisamide is an interesting therapeutic option in myoclonus-dystonia, and that bilateral pallidal stimulation has major and lasting therapeutic effects. Accumulating evidence suggests that an alteration in cerebello-thalamic pathway function may play a prominent role and that this is possibly related to a GABAergic deficit reflecting Purkinje cell dysfunction. Impaired striatal plasticity and disturbed serotonin homeostasis may also be implicated. Newly available cellular and rodent models may further assist in investigating the pathogenesis of this disorder. SUMMARY: Comprehensive analysis of the phenotype and precise classification are important in patients with myoclonus and dystonia to identify homogeneous groups of patients. This is critical to guide tailored therapeutic strategies and promote effective research.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.205
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations103
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Opinion in NeurologySame topicNeurological disorders and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207