MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4413980951 · doi:10.1139/jpn.0621

Interrelations between psychiatric symptoms and drug-induced movement disorder

2006· article· en· W4413980951 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Guy Chouinard

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Psychiatry and Neuroscience · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSchizophrenia research and treatment
Canadian institutionsInstitut universitaire en santé mentale de MontréalMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychiatryMovement (music)DrugPsychologyMedicineArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

After 30 years of clinical research into drug-induced movement disorder (DIMD), we are still facing unresolved issues regarding the interrelations between psychiatric symptoms and DIMD. Recently, I proposed a new classification of DIMD that includes abnormal movements previously labelled extrapyramidal symptoms. DIMD caused by psychotropic drugs is still confused with psychiatric symptoms treated by the same drugs. The results from 2 international multicentre trials, the InterSePT and the Ris-Consta Studies, conducted in the era of both typical and atypical antipsychotic agents, which included over 3000 patients with schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder worldwide, still showed a high, but decreasing, incidence of pretreatment DIMD, which varied from 57.5% (1998–1999) to 47.4% (1999–2000), and a decreasing incidence of tardive dyskinesia, which varied from 12% (1998–1999) to 10.2% (1999–2000), reflecting the greater use of atypical antipsychotic drugs. Furthermore, in both studies, psychiatric symptoms as measured by the Positive and Negative Symptom Scale (PANSS) were significantly correlated with DIMD and DIMD subtypes, thus suggesting the need for additional measurement instruments in schizophrenia and related psychoses.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.280 · 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 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
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Psychiatry and Neuroscience→Same topicSchizophrenia research and treatment→French-language works237,207→