MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2079700532 · doi:10.3109/00207454.2014.999268

Proceedings of the Second Annual Deep Brain Stimulation Think Tank: What's in the Pipeline

2014· review· en· W2079700532 on OpenAlexafffund
Aysegul Gunduz, Hokuto Morita, P. Justin Rossi, William L. Allen, Ron L. Alterman, Helen Brontë‐Stewart, Christopher R. Butson, David Charles, Sjaak Deckers, Coralie de Hemptinne, M.L. DeLong, Darin D. Dougherty, Jens Ellrich, Kelly D. Foote, James Giordano, Wayne K. Goodman, Benjamin D. Greenberg, David Greene, Robert E. Gross, Jack W. Judy, Edward Karst, Alexander R. Kent, Brian H. Kopell, Anthony E. Lang, Andrés M. Lozano, Codrin Lungu, Kelly E. Lyons, André G. Machado, H.C.F. Martens, Cameron C. McIntyre, Hoon‐Ki Min, Joseph S. Neimat, Jill L. Ostrem, Sat Pannu, Francisco A. Ponce, Nader Pouratian, Donnie Reymers, Lauren E. Schrock, Sameer A. Sheth, Ludy C. Shih, Scott Stanslaski, G. Karl Steinke, Paul H. Stypulkowski, Alexander I. Tröster, Leo Verhagen, Harrison C. Walker, Michael S. Okun

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Neuroscience · 2014
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeurological disorders and treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchParkinsonfondenAllerganNational Institutes of HealthUniversity of OxfordParkinson Society CanadaParkinson AllianceIpsenAvanir PharmaceuticalsUniversity of CambridgeBoston Scientific CorporationSt. Jude MedicalFondation Brain CanadaJohns Hopkins UniversityBiogenNational Parkinson FoundationNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeTeva Pharmaceutical IndustriesEli Lilly and CompanyVanderbilt UniversityUniversity of Florida Foundation
KeywordsDeep brain stimulationMultidisciplinary approachNeurosciencePipeline (software)Neurologic diseaseNeurophysiologyPsychologyNeuropsychologyParkinson's diseaseMedicineDiseasePsychiatryCognitive scienceComputer sciencePathologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The proceedings of the 2nd Annual Deep Brain Stimulation Think Tank summarize the most contemporary clinical, electrophysiological, and computational work on DBS for the treatment of neurological and neuropsychiatric disease and represent the insights of a unique multidisciplinary ensemble of expert neurologists, neurosurgeons, neuropsychologists, psychiatrists, scientists, engineers and members of industry. Presentations and discussions covered a broad range of topics, including advocacy for DBS, improving clinical outcomes, innovations in computational models of DBS, understanding of the neurophysiology of Parkinson's disease (PD) and Tourette syndrome (TS) and evolving sensor and device technologies.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.987
Threshold uncertainty score0.298

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.039
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.319 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations18
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of NeuroscienceSame topicNeurological disorders and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207