Do Stable Patients With a Premorbid Depression History Have a Worse Outcome After Deep Brain Stimulation for Parkinson Disease?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Deep brain stimulation (DBS) has been associated with mood sequelae in a subset of patients operated on in either the subthalamic nucleus or the globus pallidus internus for the treatment of Parkinson disease. OBJECTIVE: To compare mood and motor outcomes in those with and without a presurgical history of depression. METHODS: Unilateral subthalamic nucleus or unilateral globus pallidus internus DBS patients followed up for a minimum of 6 months were included. All patients underwent a comprehensive outpatient psychiatric evaluation by a board-certified psychiatrist. Psychiatric diagnoses were based on Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, fourth edition, text revision, nomenclature (American Psychiatric Association, 2000). Motor and mood outcomes were compared. RESULTS: A total of 110 patients were included. There were no significant differences in baseline variables between the 2 groups. Those with a preoperative history of depression had significantly higher Beck Depression Inventory scores than the nondepression group after DBS (8.97 ± 7.55 vs 5.92 ± 5.71; P = .04). Patients with a depression history had less improvement (11.6%) in pre/post-DBS change when Unified Parkinson Disease Rating Scale motor scores were compared (P = .03) after adjustment for stimulation site and baseline demographic and clinical variables. Patients with a higher levodopa equivalent dose had a worse clinical motor outcome. CONCLUSION: Patients with a preoperative depression history had higher Beck Depression Inventory scores after DBS and significantly less (albeit small) improvement in pre/post-DBS change in Unified Parkinson Disease Rating Scale motor scores than patients without a history of depression.
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) | 0.000 | 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".