Pre‐operative evaluations for DBS in dystonia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The preoperative evaluation in dystonia aims at characterizing the severity and topography of motor symptoms in patients, who have previously been selected for deep brain stimulation (DBS). METHODS: The literature search was performed using PubMed, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Collaborative databases. RESULTS: Commonly used scales for clinical assessment are the Burke-Fahn-Marsden dystonia rating scale for generalized dystonia and the Toronto Western Spasmodic Torticollis Scale for cervical dystonia. Motor assessment is completed by quality of life and functional scales, such as the Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) or the Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire 39. Validated rating scales for cranial or upper limb dystonia are lacking. DISCUSSION: In common clinical practice, these outcome measures can be administered in an open-label fashion because double blind assessment is only required for ascertaining new treatment indications or research purposes. The same measures are to be used postoperatively to revaluate outcome after DBS. Brain MRI is required to confirm diagnosis and assess structural abnormalities. Other imaging techniques, particularly functional imaging, are used for research purposes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".