MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7058465147

Musculoskeletal deformities and fractures in Parkinson’s disease

2011· article· en· W7058465147 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueDove Medical Press (Taylor and Francis Group) · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicMagnetic confinement fusion research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScoliosisDiseaseRachisSpinal CurvaturesLaterality
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sufian Masroor,1 M. A. Rana,2 Bashir Alenazi31McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada; 2Parkinson’s Clinic of Eastern Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; 3Armed Forces Hospital, Riyadh, Saudi ArabiaParkinson’s disease (PD) is a neurodegenerative condition that is characterized by a variety of severely debilitating motor and non-motor symptoms. Further, an increased risk of skeletal deformities and fractures, conditions ranging from scoliosis to osteoporosis, is of noteworthy importance. Following are some of the skeletal deformities seen in PD. Scoliosis, a lateral curving of the spine, is more common in PD patients than in the general population. Although the exact relationship between scoliosis and PD is not clearly known, it has been suggested that scoliosis is closely related to the dopamine deficiency associated with PD. Several studies have noted that the direction of the spinal curvature is correlated with the laterality of the major signs and symptoms of PD.1 It has been suggested that patients may slowly develop a tendency to lean towards the affected lagging side of PD during walking. This may result in the curvature of the spine seen in scoliosis, although genetic, biomechanical, or hormonal factors may play a role as well.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.256 · 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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDove Medical Press (Taylor and Francis Group)Same topicMagnetic confinement fusion researchFrench-language works237,207