MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Pallidal stimulation in cervical dystonia: clinical implications of acute changes in stimulation parameters

2009· article· en· W2086656310 on OpenAlexaffabout
Elena Moro, Panida Piboolnurak, Tamara Arenovich, Serena Hung, Yu‐Yan Poon, Andrés M. Lozano

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Neurology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeurological disorders and treatments
Canadian institutionsToronto Western HospitalUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCervical dystoniaDeep brain stimulationStimulationDystoniaNeurosciencePhysical medicine and rehabilitationAnesthesiaInternal medicinePsychiatryParkinson's diseasePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Deep brain stimulation (DBS) of the globus pallidus internus (GPi) is successful in dystonia, but the role of each electrical parameters of stimulation is unclear. We studied the clinical effects of acute changes of different parameters of GPi-DBS in cervical dystonia (CD). METHODS: Eight CD patients with bilateral GPi-DBS at 28.6 +/- 19.2 (mean +/- SD) months after surgery were recruited. Mean improvement in the Toronto Western Spasmodic Torticollis Rating Scale (TWSTRS) severity score was 54.5% compared to before surgery. Ten settings, including a combination of a wide range of pulse widths (PWs), low and high frequencies and voltage, were administered in a randomized double blinded fashion. Clinical benefit was assessed by two raters using the TWSTRS and by the patients using an analogue rating scale. RESULTS: The TWSTRS severity scores were reduced by 56.7% with stimulation at the best settings. Improvement was significantly associated with high frequency (> or = 60 Hz) and high voltage. Stimulation at 130 Hz showed the best clinical improvement. Increasing PWs (from 60 to 450 micros) did not result in a significant improvement. CONCLUSION: Frequency and amplitude appear to be the most important factors in the acute anti-dystonic effects in GPi-DBS patients with CD.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.295 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations76
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of NeurologySame topicNeurological disorders and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207