Cerebellar Brain Inhibition Is Associated With the Severity of Cervical Dystonia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Cerebellar connectivity is thought to be abnormal in cervical dystonia (CD) and other dystonia subtypes, based on evidence from imaging studies and animal work. The authors investigated whether transcranial magnetic stimulation-induced cerebellar brain inhibition (CBI), a measure of cerebellar efficiency at inhibiting motor outflow, is abnormal in patients with CD and/or is associated with clinical features of CD. Because of methodological heterogeneity in CBI reporting, the authors deployed additional controls to reduce potential sources of variability in this study. METHODS: Cerebellar brain inhibition was applied in 20 CD patients and 14 healthy control subjects. Cerebellar brain inhibition consisted of a cerebellar conditioning stimulus delivered at four different interstimulus intervals (ISIs) before a test stimulus delivered to hand muscle representation in the motor cortex. The average ratio of conditioned to unconditioned motor evoked potential was computed for each ISI. Cervical dystonia clinical severity was measured using the Toronto Western Spasmodic Torticollis Rating Scale. Control experiments involved neuronavigated transcranial magnetic stimulation, neck postural control in patients, and careful screening for noncerebellar pathway inhibition via cervicomedullary evoked potentials. RESULTS: There was no difference between CBI measured in healthy control subjects and CD patients at any of the four ISIs; however, CBI efficiency was significantly correlated with worsening CD clinical severity at the 5 ms ISI. CONCLUSIONS: Cerebellar brain inhibition is a variable measure in both healthy control subjects and CD patients; much of this variability may be attributed to experimental methodology. Yet, CD severity is significantly associated with reduced CBI at the 5 ms ISI, suggestive of cerebello-thalamo-cortical tract dysfunction in this disorder.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".