Comparison of Treatment Results between Selective Peripheral Denervation and Deep Brain Stimulation in Patients with Cervical Dystonia
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
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.
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 it