Deep Brain Stimulation Target Selection for Parkinson’s Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
During the "DBS Canada Day" symposium held in Toronto July 4-5, 2014, the scientific committee invited experts to discuss three main questions on target selection for deep brain stimulation (DBS) of patients with Parkinson's disease (PD). First, is the subthalamic nucleus (STN) or the globus pallidus internus (GPi) the ideal target? In summary, both targets are equally effective in improving the motor symptoms of PD. STN allows a greater medications reduction, while GPi exerts a direct antidyskinetic effect. Second, are there further potential targets? Ventral intermediate nucleus DBS has significant long-term benefit for tremor control but insufficiently addresses other motor features of PD. DBS in the posterior subthalamic area also reduces tremor. The pedunculopontine nucleus remains an investigational target. Third, should DBS for PD be performed unilaterally, bilaterally or staged? Unilateral STN DBS can be proposed to asymmetric patients. There is no evidence that a staged bilateral approach reduces the incidence of DBS-related adverse events.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".