Smell and taste in cervical dystonia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The pathophysiology of cervical dystonia is not completely understood. Current concepts of the pathophysiology propose that it is a network disorder involving the basal ganglia, cerebellum and sensorimotor cortex. These structures are primarily concerned with sensorimotor control but are also involved in non-motor functioning such as the processing of information related to the chemical senses. This overlap lets us hypothesize a link between cervical dystonia and altered sense of smell and taste. To prove this hypothesis and to contribute to the better understanding of cervical dystonia, we assessed olfactory and gustatory functioning in 40 adults with idiopathic cervical dystonia and 40 healthy controls. The Sniffin Sticks were used to assess odor threshold, discrimination and identification. Furthermore, the Taste Strips were applied to assess the combined taste score. Motor and non-motor deficits of cervical dystonia including neuropsychological and psychiatric alterations were assessed as cofactors for regression analyses. We found that cervical dystonia subjects had lower scores than healthy controls for odor threshold (5.8 ± 2.4 versus 8.0 ± 3.2; p = 0.001), odor identification (11.7 ± 2.3 versus 13.1 ± 1.3; p = 0.001) and the combined taste score (9.5 ± 2.2 versus 11.7 ± 2.7; p < 0.001), while no difference was found in odor discrimination (12.0 ± 2.5 versus 12.9 ± 1.8; p = 0.097). Regression analysis suggests that age is the main predictor for olfactory decline in subjects with cervical dystonia. Moreover, performance in the Montreal Cognitive Assessment is a predictor for gustatory decline in cervical dystonia subjects. Findings propose that cervical dystonia is associated with diminished olfactory and gustatory functioning.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".