Prognosis of rapid onset functional tic‐like behaviors: Prospective follow‐up over 6 months
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The prognosis of rapid onset functional tic-like behaviors (FTLBs) is unknown. This prospective cohort study describes the course and treatment of rapid onset FTLBs in adolescents (n = 20) and adults (n = 9) previously reported in two case series. METHODS: Yale Global Tic Severity Scale (YGTSS) scores were compared between first clinical presentation and 6-month follow-up assessment. All treatments used for FTLBs and any psychiatric comorbidities were recorded. RESULTS: In adolescents with FTLBs, motor tics, vocal tics, total tics, impairment, and global scores on the YGTSS significantly improved at 6 months, with a mean decrease in the YGTSS global score of 31.9 points, 95% confidence interval (CI) 15.4, 48.4, p = .0005. In adults with FTLBs, only impairment and global scores significantly improved, with a mean decrease in the YGTSS global score of 19.6 points, 95% CI -3.2, 42.3, p = .04. Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) and cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) for anxiety and depression were the most used treatment in both age groups. CONCLUSIONS: This prospective study suggests that adolescents have a better prognosis than adults with FTLBs. Management of comorbidities with SSRIs and CBT seems effective.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".