MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3217596562 · doi:10.1159/000520436

PARK2 Patient Presenting with Dopa-Responsive Dystonia

2021· article· en· W3217596562 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Fumihito Yoshii, Koji Aono, Ryuya Kumazawa, Wakoh Takahashi

Bibliographic record

VenueCase Reports in Neurology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicParkinson's Disease Mechanisms and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDystoniaMedicineInternal medicineLevodopaGTP cyclohydrolase IPediatricsDiseaseParkinson's diseasePsychiatryTetrahydrobiopterin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We report a 34-year-old female PARK2 patient presenting with dopa-responsive dystonia (DRD). She noticed difficulty in raising her foot while walking at the age of 24. Her lower limb symptoms were identified as dystonia later, and she was started on Menesit, which resulted in improvement of her symptoms. She was diagnosed as DRD and has been on continuous treatment since then. The specific binding ratio (SBR) of 123I FP-CIT SPECT was significantly lower than those of controls of the same age, but 123I-meta-iodobenzylguanidine myocardial scintigraphy showed a normal heart to mediastinum ratio. The Montreal Cognitive Assessment, Japanese version, was normal for her age. DRD is an inherited dystonia that typically begins during childhood and may be caused by mutations of the GCH1 (GTP cyclohydrolase), SPR (sepiapterin reductase), or TH (tyrosine hydroxylase) genes. Our patient was diagnosed as PARK2, known as autosomal-recessive juvenile Parkinson’s disease, based on genetic analysis. Although there was no family history of the disease, the decrease in SBR of 123I FP-CIT SPECT enabled us to diagnose PARK2 and to differentiate this from DRD due to other genetic disorders.

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)0.000
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: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0030.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCase Reports in NeurologySame topicParkinson's Disease Mechanisms and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207