Deep brain stimulation for treatment of dystonia secondary to stroke or trauma: Table 1
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Globus pallidus pars interna (GPi) deep brain stimulation (DBS) is efficacious for reduction of medically refractory, primary, generalised dystonia and subtypes of acquired dystonia,1 but there is little evidence supporting the efficacy of DBS in dystonia acquired after stroke or traumatic brain injury (TBI). Dystonia has been reported in up to 4% of patients with post-stroke2 and up to 20% of patients after severe TBI.3 Patients who develop dystonia after stroke or TBI are typically adolescents/young adults, in whom dystonia manifests in days to years after the initial event. Brain MRI abnormalities are often present, typically in the basal ganglia. The most frequent type of dystonia observed in this population is hemidystonia, which is usually refractory to medical management.3 Since young adults are predominantly afflicted and the dystonia is often medically refractory, this population experiences significant disability for the majority of their lifetime. In order to determine if DBS can be beneficial to this population, we have analysed patients’ outcomes from the Toronto Western Hospital (TWH) DBS database in a retrospective, observational study. All patients who received DBS for dystonia acquired after stroke/TBI were identified through a search of the TWH DBS dystonia database (1995–2012) and were included in the study. Dystonia was diagnosed by a movement disorder neurologist. The study was reviewed and approved by the Research Ethics Board of the University Health Network. Details of DBS surgery have been published previously.4 Post-DBS MRI were performed to verify correct …
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.047 | 0.006 |
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".