Is <scp>REM</scp> Sleep Behavior Disorder Changing? Secular Changes Versus Referral Patterns
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Since 2014, there has been increasing public outreach effort regarding isolated/idiopathic rapid eye movement (REM) sleep behavior disorder (iRBD) in Montreal. Objective: To assess if, over time, milder iRBD cases are presenting earlier. Methods: ) and by referral type ("self-referral" vs. "conventional-referral") in three large centers. Results: In Montreal, among 209 subjects followed prospectively, shorter time to phenoconversion was observed in the earlier epoch (5-year phenoconversion = 42% earlier vs. 23% later); diagnosis before 2014 had a 1.8-fold phenoconversion hazard. However, no difference was observed in 248 subjects from Barcelona and 166 from Innsbruck. Analysis of Montreal data found that increased survival in the later epoch was driven by an increasing number of self-referrals, who phenoconverted at 1/3 the rate of physician-referred subjects. Conclusions: Increased patient awareness of iRBD results in earlier presentation to clinical attention, with a longer time to phenoconversion.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".