MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4322621974 · doi:10.1055/s-0043-1764164

“Unvoluntary” Movement Disorders: Distinguishing between Tics, Akathisia, Restless Legs, and Stereotypies

2023· review· en· W4322621974 on OpenAlexaff
Christelle Nilles, Gabriel Amorelli, Tamara Pringsheim, Davide Martino

Bibliographic record

VenueSeminars in Neurology · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRestless Legs Syndrome Research
Canadian institutionsHotchkiss Brain InstituteUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTicsAkathisiaMovement disordersDystoniaPhysical medicine and rehabilitationMyoclonusMedicineChoreaDyskinesiaCognitionRestless legs syndromePsychologyNeurosciencePsychiatryParkinson's diseaseAntipsychotic

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tics, stereotypies, akathisia, and restless legs fall at different places on the spectrum of discrete, unwanted and potentially disabling motor routines. Unlike tremor, chorea, myoclonus, or dystonia, this subgroup of abnormal movements is characterized by the subject's variable ability to inhibit or release undesired motor patterns on demand. Though it may be sometimes clinically challenging, it is crucial to distinguish these "unvoluntary" motor behaviors because secondary causes and management approaches differ substantially. To this end, physicians must consider the degree of repetitiveness of the movements, the existence of volitional control, and the association with sensory symptoms, or cognitive-ideational antecedent. This review aims to summarize the current existing knowledge on phenomenology, diagnosis, and treatment of tics, stereotypies, akathisia, and restless leg syndrome.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.106
GPT teacher head0.409
Teacher spread0.303 · 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

Citations5
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSeminars in NeurologySame topicRestless Legs Syndrome ResearchFrench-language works237,207