MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2409714999 · doi:10.1503/jpn.140210

Cognitive effects of deep brain stimulation in patients with obsessive–compulsive disorder

2015· article· en· W2409714999 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Psychiatry and Neuroscience · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicObsessive-Compulsive Spectrum Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek
KeywordsDeep brain stimulationObsessive compulsiveCognitionPsychologyNeuroscienceBrain stimulationStimulationCognitive psychologyClinical psychologyMedicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Deep brain stimulation (DBS) is a promising treatment for treatment-refractory obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). However, the effects of DBS on cognitive functioning remain unclear. Therefore, we aimed to assess cognitive safety of DBS for treatment-refractory OCD and the association between clinical changes and cognitive functioning. METHODS: Patients with treatment-refractory OCD treated with DBS targeted at the nucleus accumbens (NAcc) were compared with a control group of 14 patients with treatment-refractory OCD treated with care as usual. We assessed cognitive functioning at baseline, 3 weeks postoperatively and following 8 months of DBS. We compared change in clinical symptoms with cognitive changes. RESULTS: There were 16 patients in the DBS group and 14 patients in the control group. Three weeks postoperatively, the DBS group showed a significantly reduced performance on measures of visual organization and verbal fluency and a trend toward reduced performance on measures of visual memory and abstract reasoning. Cognitive functioning was found to be stable on all other measures. After 8 months of DBS, reduced performances persisted, except for a significant improvement in verbal fluency. Cognitive functioning in all other domains remained unaffected. We found no correlation between improvement of clinical symptoms and cognitive changes. LIMITATIONS: A limitation of this study was its relatively small sample size. CONCLUSION: Deep brain stimulation targeted at the NAcc may be considered a safe method in terms of cognition because cognitive functioning was unaffected on most neuropsychological measures. Nevertheless, we observed some minor reduced performance on specific measures of executive functioning that were possibly associated with surgical intervention. Our results suggest that severity of OCD symptoms is independent of cognitive functioning.

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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.513

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.273 · 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