Gait worsening and the microlesion effect following deep brain stimulation for essential tremor
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effects of unilateral thalamic deep brain stimulation (DBS) on walking in persons with medication-refractory essential tremor (ET). METHODS: We performed laboratory-based gait analyses on 24 persons with medication-refractory ET before and after unilateral thalamic DBS implantation. Normal and tandem walking parameters were analysed across sessions (PRE-DBS/DBS OFF/DBS ON) by repeated measures analyses of variance. Pearson's correlations assessed whether changes in walking after DBS were global (ie, related across gait parameters). Baseline characteristics, lead locations and stimulation parameters were analysed as possible contributors to gait effects. RESULTS: DBS minimally affected gait at the cohort level. However, 25% of participants experienced clinically meaningful gait worsening. Walking speed decreased by >30% in two participants and by >10% in four others. Decreased walking speed correlated with increased gait variability, indicating global gait worsening in affected participants. The worsening persisted even after the stimulation was turned off. Participants with worse baseline tandem walking performance may be more likely to experience post-DBS gait worsening; the percentage of tandem missteps at baseline was nearly three times higher and tandem walking speeds were approximately 30% slower in participants who experienced gait worsening. However, these differences in tandem walking in persons with gait worsening as compared with those without worsening were not statistically significant. Lead locations and stimulation parameters were similar in participants with and without gait worsening. CONCLUSION: Global gait worsening occurred in 25% of participants with unilateral DBS for medication-refractory ET. The effect was present on and off stimulation, likely indicating a microlesion effect.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".