Surgical Management of Parkinson's Disease in the Elderly
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Deep Brain Stimulation (DBS) is an increasingly popular therapy for Parkinson's Disease (PD). Despite the experience gained over time with DBS of either the subthalamus or the globus pallidus pars interna, there is still no consensus regarding the age limit for DBS indication. OBJECTIVES: This narrative review of the literature discusses the issues of age and DBS, emphasizing the critical need for good quality evidence to support the surgical management of elderly patients with PD. METHODS: We searched PubMed using the terms Parkinson's Disease; Parkinson's Disease therapy; deep brain stimulation; antiparkinsonian agents therapeutic use; age factors; aged; aged, 80 and over; middle aged; treatment outcome; and risk assessments. RESULTS: We identified several limitations of the available evidence, such as under-representation of older patients in DBS studies, small sample sizes in studies with older participants, heterogeneity of outcomes, and conflicting results. CONCLUSIONS: Despite preliminary suggestions that age might affect the outcomes of DBS, the evidence to support the hypothesis of age as an independent predictor of DBS outcomes is limited and results are controversial. Ultimately, finding an age-independent biomarker predicting DBS outcome is the final goal to expand this powerful treatment to all patients age in an effective and safe manner.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it