Clinical Profile of Non-Motor Symptoms in Patients with Essential Tremor: Impact on Quality of Life and Age-Related Differences
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<strong>Background:</strong> Identifying the clinical phenotypes of non-motor symptoms (NMSs) of essential tremor (ET) among different populations is necessary due to their impact on the quality of life (QoL). This study aimed to investigate the clinical phenotype and impact of NMSs on QoL in Egyptian patients with ET. <strong>Methods:</strong> Thirty ET patients were compared to 30 matched controls. Subjects were evaluated by the Fahn-Tolosa-Marin Tremor Rating Scale, Non-Motor Symptoms Scale (NMSS), Montreal Cognitive Assessment, Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale, Beck Depression Inventory, Pittsburgh Sleep quality Index, and the Short Form 36 Health Survey Questionnaire. Both groups were divided into two subgroups of younger (<45 years, 14 patients) and older age (>45 years, 16 patients) groups, to investigate age-related differences. <strong>Results:</strong> ET patients showed significantly worse cognition, depression, anxiety, sleep and NMSS domains (p < 0.001), compared to controls, that negatively affected and predicted QoL. Older patients had more cognitive impairment (p = 0.003) and worse sleep/fatigue (p = 0.032) and sexual functions (p = 0.006), compared to younger group. <strong>Discussion:</strong> The study supports that NMSs are integral part of ET, negatively affect QoL, and similarly affect younger and older patients. Therefore, NMSs should be explored for proper care of ET patients.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".