Neuronal Activity and Synaptic Plasticity in a Reimplanted STN-DBS Patient with Parkinson’s Disease: Recordings from Two Surgeries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The authors report the case of an elderly male in his 60s who, after 5 months of efficacious treatment with chronic deep brain stimulation of the subthalamic nucleus (STN-DBS), developed a hardware-related erosion necessitating removal of the complete DBS system. One and a half years following the first implantation, a new STN-DBS system was implanted along an immediately adjacent trajectory, and reproduction of clinical efficacy was reported. Additionally, 2 microstimulation protocols were compared between the 2 surgeries, i.e., one to assess the stimulation frequency response of STN neurons and another to assess inhibitory synaptic plasticity in the substantia nigra pars reticulata (SNr). The spontaneous neuronal firing rates of STN neurons in each hemisphere were also compared between the 2 surgeries. The results suggest that the frequency-sensitivity of STN neurons may have been reduced (i.e., more resistant to neuronal suppression), while the spontaneous baseline firing rates of STN neurons and the plasticity measured in the SNr remained unchanged (2 factors that may be indicative of neurodegenerative processes).
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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".