MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3091280059 · doi:10.46278/j.ncacn.20180625

Congenital Mirror Movements: Behavioral, Neural, Genetic, and Clinical Issues

2018· article· en· W3091280059 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jordan Gardner, Elizabeth A. Franz

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuropsychologie clinique et appliquée · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMirroringMechanism (biology)PsychologyNeuroscienceSomatosensory systemPhysical medicine and rehabilitationMedicineCommunication

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Non-syndromic congenital mirror movements (CMM) is a rare neurological condition, either inherited or sporadic, in which affected individuals lack independent dexterity of hand and finger movements. With all volitional movements of the hands and fingers, unintentional mirroring occurs in the opposite-side homologous effectors. A hallmark neural mechanism of CMM is abnormal, active, extra ipsilateral corticospinal tracts. Mutations in four different causal genes have been identified so far. The present review considers the physiology underlying CMM, including its implicated neural mechanisms and clinical relevance. The heterogeneous nature of the condition is highlighted, particularly in terms of the clinical importance of factors associated with the mirroring phenotype or phenotypes. Speculation about the possible effects of CMM on the somatosensory system is also included as a prospective direction for further study. Despite some inconvenience and occasional discomfort associated with CMM, the potential for highly positive life outcomes is illuminated. Lastly, CMM management is discussed as a key goal toward which future research should stride.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.801
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.176
GPT teacher head0.471
Teacher spread0.296 · 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.

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

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuropsychologie clinique et appliquéeSame topicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation StudiesFrench-language works237,207