Tic Disorders Care Gaps in Spanish‐Speaking Latin America
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Primary tic disorders (TD) are common movement disorders in childhood. However, it is unclear if international guidelines are applied in Latin America. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the applicability of TD guidelines in Latin America. METHODS: An online survey was developed and distributed to healthcare professionals treating TD across Latin America. RESULTS: Healthcare providers from 15 countries participated. TD are mainly diagnosed by general neurologists (85%). There is limited access to public clinics for movement disorders or TD, and 80% do not utilize a protocol. Rating scales are rarely used. More than half reported being unaware of resources for psychoeducation. Non-pharmacological interventions for TD and alpha agonists are unavailable in several countries. Consequently, antipsychotics are the first line treatment. CONCLUSIONS: The ubiquity of TD diagnosis throughout Latin America is a positive aspect, however barriers like limited referral pathways, lack of awareness about tics and treatment options do exist. This highlights the need for more effective pathways for TD in Latin America.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".