MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Tourette syndrome research highlights from 2024

2025· article· en· W4416004233 on OpenAlexaff
Andreas Hartmann, Per E. Andrén, Cyril Atkinson-Clément, Virginie Czernecki, Cécile Delorme, Simon Morand‐Beaulieu, Nanette Mol Debes, Kirsten Müller‐Vahl, Peristera Paschou, Natalia Szejko, Apostolia Topaloudi, Kevin J. Black

Bibliographic record

VenueF1000Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicObsessive-Compulsive Spectrum Disorders
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersFP7 HealthFP7 People: Marie-Curie ActionsNational Institute of Mental HealthBiogenMinisterstwo ZdrowiaDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftNational Science FoundationGW PharmaceuticalsNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeBundesministerium für Bildung und ForschungAmerican Brain FoundationNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesTourette Association of AmericaAlexion PharmaceuticalsNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsTourette syndromeOpen peer reviewIconTicsPlant biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We summarize research reports from 2024 relevant to Tourette syndrome, which the authors consider the most important or interesting. This working draft aims to submit this content for publication around the beginning of 2025 in the yearly Tourette Syndrome Research Highlights series on F1000Research. The authors welcome article suggestions and thoughtful feedback from readers, who can add a comment by clicking on the rectangular comment box icon to the left of the LOG IN link at the top of this page. For private comments, you can reach us by email (andreas.hartmann@aphp.fr or kevin@wustl.edu).

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.114
Threshold uncertainty score0.381

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0060.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1140.074

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.417
Teacher spread0.373 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueF1000ResearchSame topicObsessive-Compulsive Spectrum DisordersFrench-language works237,207