Deep Brain Stimulation in Pediatric Populations: A Scoping Review of the Clinical Trial Landscape
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
INTRODUCTION: There has been rapid advancement in the development of deep brain stimulation (DBS) as a treatment option for adults for neurological and neuropsychiatric conditions. Here, we present a scoping review of completed and ongoing clinical trials focused on DBS in pediatric populations, highlighting key knowledge gaps. METHODS: Three databases (PubMed, OVID, and Embase) and the clinicaltrials.gov registry were queried to identify clinical trials for DBS in pediatric cohorts (age ≤18 years). Prospective and retrospective case series were excluded. No restrictions were placed on the diagnoses or measured clinical outcomes. Individual patient demographics, diagnosis, DBS target, and primary endpoints were extracted and summarized. RESULTS: A total of 13 clinical trials were included in the final review, consisting of 9 completed trials (357 screened) and 4 ongoing trials (82 screened). Of the completed trials, 6 studied dystonia (both inherited and acquired; participants aged 4-18 years) and 3 studied drug-resistant epilepsy (participants aged 4-17 years). Among the 6 trials for dystonia, 5 used the Burke-Fahn-Marsden Dystonia Rating Scale (BFMDRS) as the primary endpoint. There were a total of 18 adverse events documented across 63 participants, with 5 of 9 studies reporting adverse events. Ongoing clinical trials are evaluating DBS for dystonia (N = 2), epilepsy (N = 1), and self-injurious behavior (N = 1). CONCLUSIONS: This scoping review summarizes the landscape of clinical trials for DBS in children and youth. In dystonia, further research is warranted with more relevant pediatric outcome measures and for understudied patient subgroups and targets. There are also significant gaps in our understanding of evaluating the role of DBS in other neurological and neurodevelopmental disorders in pediatric populations. INTRODUCTION: There has been rapid advancement in the development of deep brain stimulation (DBS) as a treatment option for adults for neurological and neuropsychiatric conditions. Here, we present a scoping review of completed and ongoing clinical trials focused on DBS in pediatric populations, highlighting key knowledge gaps. METHODS: Three databases (PubMed, OVID, and Embase) and the clinicaltrials.gov registry were queried to identify clinical trials for DBS in pediatric cohorts (age ≤18 years). Prospective and retrospective case series were excluded. No restrictions were placed on the diagnoses or measured clinical outcomes. Individual patient demographics, diagnosis, DBS target, and primary endpoints were extracted and summarized. RESULTS: A total of 13 clinical trials were included in the final review, consisting of 9 completed trials (357 screened) and 4 ongoing trials (82 screened). Of the completed trials, 6 studied dystonia (both inherited and acquired; participants aged 4-18 years) and 3 studied drug-resistant epilepsy (participants aged 4-17 years). Among the 6 trials for dystonia, 5 used the Burke-Fahn-Marsden Dystonia Rating Scale (BFMDRS) as the primary endpoint. There were a total of 18 adverse events documented across 63 participants, with 5 of 9 studies reporting adverse events. Ongoing clinical trials are evaluating DBS for dystonia (N = 2), epilepsy (N = 1), and self-injurious behavior (N = 1). CONCLUSIONS: This scoping review summarizes the landscape of clinical trials for DBS in children and youth. In dystonia, further research is warranted with more relevant pediatric outcome measures and for understudied patient subgroups and targets. There are also significant gaps in our understanding of evaluating the role of DBS in other neurological and neurodevelopmental disorders in pediatric populations.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,051 | 0,147 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,008 | 0,006 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,014 | 0,017 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,005 | 0,004 |
| Science ouverte | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,004 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,005 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».