MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Neuropsychiatric symptoms in spinocerebellar ataxias and Friedreich ataxia

2023· review· en· W4367595738 on OpenAlexaff
Simona Karamazovová, Veronika Matušková, Zahinoor Ismail, Martin Vyhnálek

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicGenetic Neurodegenerative Diseases
Canadian institutionsOntario Brain InstituteUniversity of Calgary
FundersGrantová Agentura, Univerzita KarlovaEuropean CommissionUniverzita Karlova v Praze
KeywordsDysarthriaApathyAtaxiaSpinocerebellar ataxiaPsychologyPsychosisAnxietyCognitionPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPsychiatryNarrative reviewMedicineNeurosciencePsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Apart from its role in motor coordination, the importance of the cerebellum in cognitive and affective processes has been recognized in the past few decades. Spinocerebellar ataxias (SCA) and Friedreich ataxia (FRDA) are rare neurodegenerative diseases of the cerebellum presenting mainly with a progressive loss of gait and limb coordination, dysarthria, and other motor disturbances, but also a range of cognitive and neuropsychiatric symptoms. This narrative review summarizes the current knowledge on neuropsychiatric impairment in SCA and FRDA. We discuss the prevalence, clinical features and treatment approaches in the most commonly reported domains of depression, anxiety, apathy, agitation and impulse dyscontrol, and psychosis. Since these symptoms have a considerable impact on patients' quality of life, we argue that further research is mandated to improve the detection and treatment options of neuropsychiatric co-morbidities in ataxia 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 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)0.000
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.210
GPT teacher head0.412
Teacher spread0.202 · 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

Citations39
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuroscience & Biobehavioral ReviewsSame topicGenetic Neurodegenerative DiseasesFrench-language works237,207