Milestones in Tremor Research: 10 Years Later
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it