Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Various movement disorders are now treated with stereotactic procedures, particularly deep brain stimulation. We review the neurosurgical treatment of dystonias and tics, focusing mainly on the surgical aspects and outcome of deep brain stimulation. RECENT FINDINGS: Pallidal stimulation is nowadays the mainstay surgical treatment for patients with dystonia, particularly generalized dystonia. Various well designed recent clinical trials support the efficacy of the procedure. Improvements of 40-80% have been reported in primary generalized, segmental and cervical dystonia. For secondary dystonia, a similar outcome has been described in patients with tardive dystonia and pantothenate kinase-associated neurodegeneration. In patients with Tourette's syndrome, the results of the first trials with thalamic and pallidal deep brain stimulation have been very promising. Improvements of 70-90% in the frequency of tics have been reported with surgery in both targets. SUMMARY: Deep brain stimulation has become an established therapy for dystonia and is currently being used to treat Tourette's syndrome. With accumulation of experience, clinical features that are more responsive to surgery and the best surgical candidates will be revealed. This will likely improve even further the outcome of surgery for the treatment of these disorders.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".