Subthalamic nucleus deep brain stimulation for parkinson's disease after successful pallidotomy: Clinical and electrophysiological observations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Unilateral pallidotomy is an effective treatment for contralateral parkinsonism and dyskinesia, yet symptoms progress in many patients. Little is known about whether such patients obtain a useful response to subsequent bilateral subthalamic nucleus deep brain stimulation (STN DBS). Changes in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Motor and Activities of Daily Living (ADL) scores, medication requirements, and dyskinesias were measured. Clinical outcomes were compared to patients with de novo STN DBS. Neuronal recordings were performed. STN DBS resulted in a significant reduction in UPDRS Motor scores (42.1%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 26.9-57.4; P = 0.03), comparable with de novo STN DBS surgery (41%; 95% CI, 26-46%; P < 0.001). There was also less change in dyskinesia duration and disability scores (P = 0.017, 0.005). There were no side-to-side differences clinically or in the STN neuronal firing rates and patterns. Bilateral STN DBS is safe and efficacious in improving motor symptoms in patients with prior pallidotomy.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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 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".