Deep Brain Stimulation Can Preserve Working Status in Parkinson’s Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives. Our investigation aimed at evaluating if bilateral subthalamic deep brain stimulation (DBS) could preserve working capability in Parkinson's disease (PD). Materials. We reviewed the data of 40 young (<60 year-old) PD patients who underwent DBS implantation and had at least 2 years of follow-up. Patients were categorized based on their working capability at time of surgery: "active job" group (n = 20) and "no job" group (n = 20). Baseline characteristics were comparable. Quality of life (EQ-5D) and presence of active job were evaluated preoperatively and 2 years postoperatively. Results. Although similar (approximately 50%) improvement was achieved in the severity of motor and major nonmotor symptoms in both groups, the postoperative quality of life was significantly better in the "active job" group (0.687 versus 0.587, medians, p < 0.05). Majority (80%) of "active job" group members were able to preserve their job 2 years after the operation. However, only a minimal portion (5%) of the "no job" group members was able to return to the world of active employees (p < 0.01). Conclusions. Although our study has several limitations, our results suggest that in patients with active job the appropriately "early" usage of DBS might help preserve working capability and gain higher improvement in quality of life.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".