New and emerging treatments for symptomatic tardive dyskinesia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abdul Qayyum Rana,1–4 Zishan M Chaudry,5 Pierre J Blanchet6 1Parkinson's Clinic of Eastern Toronto and Movement Disorders Centre, Toronto, ON, Canada; 2Scarborough Memory Program, Toronto, ON, Canada; 3Journal of Parkinsonism and RLS, Toronto, ON, Canada; 4Bulletin of World Parkinson's Program, Toronto, ON, Canada; 5Saba University School of Medicine, The Bottom, Saba, Dutch Caribbean; 6Department of Stomatology, University of Montreal, Montreal, QC, Canada Abstract: The aim of this review is to assess new, emerging, and experimental treatment options for tardive dyskinesia (TD). The methods to obtain relevant studies for review included a MEDLINE search and a review of studies in English, along with checking reference lists of articles. The leading explanatory models of TD development include dopamine receptor supersensitivity, GABA depletion, cholinergic deficiency, neurotoxicity, oxidative stress, changes in synaptic plasticity, and defective neuroadaptive signaling. As such, a wide range of treatment options are available. To provide a complete summary of choices we review atypical antipsychotics along with resveratrol, botulinum toxin, Ginkgo biloba, tetrabenazine, clonazepam, melatonin, essential fatty acids, zonisamide, levetiracetam, branched-chain amino acids, drug combinations, and invasive surgical treatments. There is currently no US Food and Drug Administration-approved treatment for TD; however, prudent use of atypical antipsychotics with routine monitoring remain the cornerstone of therapy, with experimental treatment options available for further management. Keywords: tardive dyskinesia, first-generation antipsychotics, motor symptoms, schizophrenia, Parkinson's, atypical antipsychotics
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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; 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".