MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2582662550 · doi:10.1002/mds.26924

Speech and language adverse effects after thalamotomy and deep brain stimulation in patients with movement disorders: A meta‐analysis

2017· review· en· W2582662550 on OpenAlexaff
Soha Alomar, Nicolas Kon Kam King, Joseph Tam, Ausaf Bari, Clement Hamani, Andrés M. Lozano

Bibliographic record

VenueMovement Disorders · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeurological disorders and treatments
Canadian institutionsToronto Western HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThalamotomyMovement disordersDeep brain stimulationThalamic stimulatorMedicinePhysical medicine and rehabilitationEssential tremorStimulationMeta-analysisAdverse effectNeurosciencePsychologyAudiologyParkinson's diseaseDiseaseInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The thalamus has been a surgical target for the treatment of various movement disorders. Commonly used therapeutic modalities include ablative and nonablative procedures. A major clinical side effect of thalamic surgery is the appearance of speech problems. OBJECTIVE: This review summarizes the data on the development of speech problems after thalamic surgery. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed using nine databases, including Medline, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library. We also checked for articles by searching citing and cited articles. We retrieved studies between 1960 and September 2014. RESULTS: Of a total of 2,320 patients, 19.8% (confidence interval: 14.8-25.9) had speech difficulty after thalamotomy. Speech difficulty occurred in 15% (confidence interval: 9.8-22.2) of those treated with a unilaterally and 40.6% (confidence interval: 29.5-52.8) of those treated bilaterally. Speech impairment was noticed 2- to 3-fold more commonly after left-sided procedures (40.7% vs. 15.2%). Of the 572 patients that underwent DBS, 19.4% (confidence interval: 13.1-27.8) experienced speech difficulty. Subgroup analysis revealed that this complication occurs in 10.2% (confidence interval: 7.4-13.9) of patients treated unilaterally and 34.6% (confidence interval: 21.6-50.4) treated bilaterally. After thalamotomy, the risk was higher in Parkinson's patients compared to patients with essential tremor: 19.8% versus 4.5% in the unilateral group and 42.5% versus 13.9% in the bilateral group. After DBS, this rate was higher in essential tremor patients. CONCLUSION: Both lesioning and stimulation thalamic surgery produce adverse effects on speech. Left-sided and bilateral procedures are approximately 3-fold more likely to cause speech difficulty. This effect was higher after thalamotomy compared to DBS. In the thalamotomy group, the risk was higher in Parkinson's patients, whereas in the DBS group it was higher in patients with essential tremor. Understanding the pathophysiology of speech disturbance after thalamic procedures is a priority. © 2017 International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.

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 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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.652
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.286 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations112
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMovement DisordersSame topicNeurological disorders and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207