MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2169661540 · doi:10.1002/mds.22735

Long‐term results of a multicenter study on subthalamic and pallidal stimulation in Parkinson's disease

2010· article· en· W2169661540 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueMovement Disorders · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeurological disorders and treatments
Canadian institutionsToronto Western HospitalUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeep brain stimulationSubthalamic nucleusParkinson's diseaseMedicineRating scaleAdverse effectStimulationGlobus pallidusCentral nervous system diseasePhysical medicine and rehabilitationPsychologyPhysical therapyInternal medicineDiseaseBasal gangliaCentral nervous system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We report the 5 to 6 year follow-up of a multicenter study of bilateral subthalamic nucleus (STN) and globus pallidus internus (GPi) deep brain stimulation (DBS) in advanced Parkinson's disease (PD) patients. Thirty-five STN patients and 16 GPi patients were assessed at 5 to 6 years after DBS surgery. Primary outcome measure was the stimulation effect on the motor Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) assessed with a prospective cross-over double-blind assessment without medications (stimulation was randomly switched on or off). Secondary outcomes were motor UPDRS changes with unblinded assessments in off- and on-medication states with and without stimulation, activities of daily living (ADL), anti-PD medications, and dyskinesias. In double-blind assessment, both STN and GPi DBS were significantly effective in improving the motor UPDRS scores (STN, P < 0.0001, 45.4%; GPi, P = 0.008, 20.0%) compared with off-stimulation, regardless of the sequence of stimulation. In open assessment, both STN- and GPi-DBS significantly improved the off-medication motor UPDRS when compared with before surgery (STN, P < 0.001, 50.5%; GPi, P = 0.002, 35.6%). Dyskinesias and ADL were significantly improved in both groups. Anti-PD medications were significantly reduced only in the STN group. Adverse events were more frequent in the STN group. These results confirm the long-term efficacy of STN and GPi DBS in advanced PD. Although the surgical targets were not randomized, there was a trend to a better outcome of motor signs in the STN-DBS patients and fewer adverse events in the GPi-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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.453

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.267 · 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