MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1511950090 · doi:10.1186/1753-6561-9-s1-a39

Investigation of the therapeutic applications, neuroanatomical targets and emerging technologies in deep brain stimulation surgery

2015· article· en· W1511950090 on OpenAlexaffabout
M Yostos, Kathleen R. Murphy

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Proceedings · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeurological disorders and treatments
Canadian institutionsMount Sinai HospitalToronto Western Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeep brain stimulationMedicineBrain stimulationStimulationNeuroscienceBiomedical engineeringPathologyInternal medicinePsychologyParkinson's disease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

First developed in France in 1987, Deep Brain Stimulation (DBS) is a neurosurgical intervention that involves the implantation of a brain pacemaker, which electrically stimulates specific brain nuclei.1 The FDA approved DBS for treatment for Essential Tremor in 1997, Parkinson’s Disease in 2002 and Dystonia in 2003.1 More recently, DBS has been indicated in management of neuropsychiatric disorders such as: Chronic Pain, Major Depression, Obsessive Compulsive Disorder and Anorexia Nervosa. Although effective, the exact mode of function of DBS remains poorly understood. Up to 2012, literature search yielded 84 peer-reviewed DBS studies that included over 296 psychiatric patients.2 The Canadian United Health Network (UHN) Krembil Neuroscience Centre is pioneering DBS research. Current neuroimaging, intra-operative electrophysiology and emerging DBS electrode and targeting technologies have improved DBS accuracy, effectiveness and acceptability. Objective: To examine the role of DBS in the management of motor and neuropsychiatric disorders and to provide, for the first time, a review of all anatomical DBS targets to date. To evaluate the accuracy of emerging DBS targeting and electrode technologies. Research for this paper was carried out using Pubmed, UHN online library, Medline, Google Scholar and UHN Grant Reviews. Papers were limited to those published in English between the years 2000 and 2013. Research was conducted at the Department of Radiology at the Toronto Western Hospital, UHN. More than 26 anatomical targets have been identified for the treatment of movement and neuropsychiatric disorders. There is yet to be a large longitudinal cohort study confirming DBS usefulness and safety. DBS decreases disease burden by providing immediate improvement in the quality of life. Cost-utility analysis reveals that DBS has a high Quality-Adjusted Life Year (QALY) score.3 New neuroimaging technologies are enhancing DBS preoperative neuroimaging planning, intraoperative neuroimaging guidance and post-operative neuroimaging follow-up. Anatomical brain atlases, combined MR/CT, electrophysiological databases, registered surgical targets of previous patients and integrated functional and anatomical references have cumulatively shown to increase DBS targeting accuracy.4 Emerging research aims at developing electrodes from non-metals such as Carbon, in order to prevent metal-induced field distortion and MR artefacts. Guide tubes and stylettes are being introduced to refine DBS accuracy. DBS is a promising technology for severe, chronic movement and neuropsychiatric disorders. Continuous efforts to increase DBS targeting accuracy, improve on current DBS equipment systems and identify new anatomical targets are currently internationally pursued.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.055
Threshold uncertainty score0.182

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.274
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations2
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC ProceedingsSame topicNeurological disorders and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207