MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210565590 · doi:10.1002/mdc3.13418

Milestones in Tremor Research: 10 Years Later

2022· review· en· W4210565590 on OpenAlexaff
Roberto Erro, Alfonso Fasano, Paolo Barone, Kailash P. Bhatia

Bibliographic record

VenueMovement Disorders Clinical Practice · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeurological disorders and treatments
Canadian institutionsOntario Brain InstituteToronto Western HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEssential tremorThalamotomyDeep brain stimulationDystoniaThalamic stimulatorNeuroscienceMovement disordersMedicinePsychologyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationDiseaseParkinson's disease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Major progress has occurred during the last decade in the field of tremor. From the clinical standpoint, a new classification has completely revised the nosology of tremor syndromes and has re-conceptualized essential tremor as a syndrome rather than a single disease entity, fueling an ongoing enlightened debate. Significant advances have been obtained in terms of instrumental measurement of tremor, remarking on the possibility of developing novel treatment strategies based on tremor characteristics, namely tremor-phase. Moreover, a better understanding of the pathophysiological mechanisms has further led to the suggestion of refining the classification of tremor syndromes according to their driving underpinnings. Finally, surgical options such as deep brain stimulation and focused ultrasound thalamotomy are now part of the therapeutic portfolio for tremor, but several oral drugs, including long-chain alcohols, T-channel blockers, allosteric modulators of potassium channels, and of GABA-A receptors, are currently being tested and hold promise. This review will discuss the key milestones in tremor research of the last 10 years, with a focus on the most common tremor syndromes, namely essential tremor, dystonic tremor, and Parkinsonian tremor.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.005

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 head0.391
GPT teacher head0.548
Teacher spread0.157 · 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

Citations33
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMovement Disorders Clinical PracticeSame topicNeurological disorders and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207