MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388132603 · doi:10.1007/s10072-023-07157-1

Content overlap of 91 dystonia symptoms among the seven most commonly used cervical dystonia scales

2023· article· en· W4388132603 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Adrian Andrzej Chrobak, Jakub Rusinek, Małgorzata Dec‐Ćwiek, Karolina Porębska, Marcin Siwek

Bibliographic record

VenueNeurological Sciences · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBotulinum Toxin and Related Neurological Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCervical dystoniaDystoniaSpasmodic TorticollisRating scaleNeurologyPhysical therapyBotulinum toxinTorticollisMovement disordersFocal dystoniaPhysical medicine and rehabilitationMedicineSeverity of illnessDeep brain stimulationPsychologyPsychiatryAnesthesiaSurgeryInternal medicineParkinson's diseaseDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Dystonia is a movement disorder characterized by sustained or intermittent muscle contractions. Cervical dystonia (CD) is the most common focal dystonia. There are several instruments assessing the symptoms of CD. However, different scales assess different features which may lead to poor patient evaluation. AIM: The aim of the study was to evaluate the degree of overlap of most often used CD rating scales identified by the literature review. METHODS: A thorough search of the Medline database was conducted in September 2021. Then the frequency of each scale was calculated, and 7 most common scales were included in the content overlap analysis using Jaccard index (0 - no overlap, 1 - full overlap). RESULTS: Toronto Western Spasmodic Torticollis Rating Scale (TWSTRS), Tsui score, Burke-Fahn-Marsden Dystonia Rating Scale (BFMDRS), Cervical Dystonia Impact Profile 58 (CDIP-58), Craniocervical Dystonia Questionnaire 24 (CDQ-24), Cervical Dystonia Severity Rating Scale (CDSS), Cervical Dystonia Severity Rating Scale (DDS) and The Dystonia Non-Motor Symptoms Questionnaire (DNMSQuest) were the most common scales. 91 CD symptoms were distinguished from 134 items used in the scales. The mean overlap among all scales was 0.17. 52 (62%) symptoms were examined by more than one scale. The CIDP-58 captured the highest number of symptoms (63.0%), while the CDSS captured the lowest number (8.0%). None of the symptoms were examined by seven instruments. CONCLUSIONS: There was a very weak overlap among scales. High inconsistency between the scales may lead to highly different dystonia severity assessment in clinical practice. Thus, the instruments should be combined.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.051
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeurological SciencesSame topicBotulinum Toxin and Related Neurological DisordersFrench-language works237,207