The Phenomenology of Tics in Adults: Data From the Calgary and Paris Adult Tic Disorders Registry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: This study investigated the phenomenology of tics in adults with primary tic disorders (Tourette syndrome, persistent motor or phonic tic disorders) and how these features are influenced by sex. It also examined the prevalence of comorbid psychiatric conditions and psychotropic medication use. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted on 227 adults with primary tic disorders from the Calgary and Paris Adult Tic Registry. Data collected included demographics, tic characteristics (using the Yale Global Tic Severity Scale), psychiatric comorbidities, and medication use. Statistical analyses were performed to compare data between sexes. RESULTS: The sex ratio was 1.8 males to 1 female. The most common motor tics were simple (eye blinking, simple head movements), and the most common phonic tic was throat clearing. There were no significant sex differences in tic phenomenology or severity. Generalized anxiety disorder (49.5%) and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) (35.8%) were the most common comorbidities. A lower proportion of women were diagnosed with ADHD, while a higher proportion were diagnosed with obsessive compulsive disorder. CONCLUSION: The male predominance of tic disorders is less marked in adulthood compared to childhood. Tic phenomenology and severity do not significantly differ between sexes. These findings provide valuable insights into the clinical presentation of tic disorders in adults. Future research will explore severity of comorbid mental health conditions, how these influence tic severity, treatment outcomes and quality of life.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".