MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Data Sheet 1_Drug-induced Parkinson-like events: a real-world study from 2004 to the first quarter of 2024 based on FAERS.docx

2025· dataset· en· W6908564473 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2025
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicPsychiatry, Mental Health, Neuroscience
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPharmacovigilanceQuarter (Canadian coin)Adverse effectAdverse drug eventOdds ratioAdverse Event Reporting SystemEvent (particle physics)Drug

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Timely identification of drug-induced Parkinson-like events is essential to improve clinical management and enhance patients’ quality of life. However, there is a significant lack of studies addressing these events in real-world settings. Methods To bridge this gap, we analyzed adverse event (AE) reports related to Parkinson-like events from the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database from the first quarter of 2004 to the first quarter of 2024. Our objective was to summarize a list of potential drugs at high risk for Parkinson-like events and their corresponding proportions of AE reports. Results As a result, a total of 54,639 AE reports linked to Parkinson-like events involving 1,224 drugs were identified. Among these, carbidopa/levodopa exhibited the highest number of reports, followed by baclofen and pimavanserin. The most frequently reported drug class was antiparkinsonian drugs and psycholeptics, followed by psychoanaleptics. Using two disproportionate analysis methods, the reporting odds ratio and proportional reporting ratio, we found that 136 drugs exhibited positive results in both methods, while 1,063 drugs did not show any positive signals. Conclusion This study provides a comprehensive pharmacovigilance analysis of drugs associated with Parkinson-like events, aiming to promote rational drug use and inform clinical practice.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Open science, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0140.003
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.060
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.273 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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 venueFigshareSame topicPsychiatry, Mental Health, NeuroscienceFrench-language works237,207