MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387312602 · doi:10.1212/cpj.0000000000200202

Movement Disorders and Other Neurologic Impairment Associated With Hypomagnesemia

2023· review· en· W4387312602 on OpenAlexaff
Somdattaa Ray, Kye Won Park

Bibliographic record

VenueNeurology Clinical Practice · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicMagnesium in Health and Disease
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMovement disordersChoreaHypomagnesemiaDysarthriaMedicineAthetosisCerebellar vermisMyokymiaAtaxiaMyoclonusPediatricsCardiologyInternal medicineAnesthesiaPhysical medicine and rehabilitationAudiologyElectromyographyCerebellumPsychiatryDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose of Review: The objective of this study was to explore the clinical spectrum of movement disorders and associated neurologic findings in hypomagnesemia and challenges in diagnosis and treatment. Recent Findings: Sixty patients were identified in the literature for analysis. Movement disorders observed were postural tremor (23.3%, n = 14), resting tremor (8.3%, n = 5), intention tremor (10%, n = 6), ataxia involving the trunk (48.3%, n = 29) or limbs (25%, n = 15) and dysarthria (21.7%, n = 13), athetosis (8.3%, n = 5), myoclonus (6.7%, n = 4), and chorea (1.8%, n = 1). Symptoms may be accompanied by downbeat nystagmus, tetany, drowsiness, vertigo, and proximal muscle weakness. Residual deficits were noted in 16 (26.67%) patients. Serum magnesium was 1.3 mg/dL or lower in 53 patients (88.3%). Imaging findings include bilateral cerebellar (20%, n = 11) and vermis hyperintensities (9.09%, n = 5) and normal imaging. Proton pump inhibitors are the commonest etiology. Summary: The movement disorders linked with hypomagnesemia can be associated with varied neurologic symptoms. A high degree of suspicion will enable early diagnosis to prevent residual deficits.

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)0.002
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 score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.119
GPT teacher head0.459
Teacher spread0.340 · 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

Citations11
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeurology Clinical PracticeSame topicMagnesium in Health and DiseaseFrench-language works237,207