Comparison of Treatment Results between Selective Peripheral Denervation and Deep Brain Stimulation in Patients with Cervical Dystonia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND/AIMS: Cervical dystonia (CD) is the most common form of focal dystonia. The treatment options for CD include medical therapy and surgery. The 3 basic types of CD are tonic, phasic and tremulous. Selective peripheral denervation (SPD) and globus pallidus internus (GPi) deep brain stimulation (DBS) have been developed as therapeutic options for the treatment of CD. METHODS: Between 1997 and 2009, 24 patients with CD underwent operations: either SPD (n = 16) or DBS (n = 8). The mean follow-up period was 29.5 months (range = 2-59). The mean age at onset of symptoms was 46.6 years (range = 27-65). The patients were evaluated with the subjective scores and the Toronto Western Spasmodic Torticollis Scale scores. RESULTS: All patients showed gradual improvement after SPD and DBS. No statistically significant differences were seen between the SPD group and the DBS group. However, there was a trend toward greater pain reduction in the DBS group (p = 0.094). CONCLUSION: Both the SPD group and the DBS group showed successful improvement in their Toronto Western Spasmodic Torticollis Scale scores as well as subjective scores. The GPi DBS group showed a remarkable improvement on the pain scale and there was a trend toward greater pain reduction in the DBS group.
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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".