Correlation between Electrode Location and Anxiety Depression of Subthalamic Nucleus Deep Brain Stimulation in Parkinson’s Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: our group explored the correlation between postoperative coordinates of the electrode contacts, VTA, and anxiety and depression symptoms in Parkinson’s disease (PD) patients after subthalamic nucleus deep brain stimulation (STN-DBS). Methods: STN-DBS was conducted on PD patients (n = 57) for six months with follow-up. Clinical outcomes were explored using the unified Parkinson’s disease rating scale Part III (UPDRS-III), the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAM-A), and the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D) before and after surgery. At the Montreal Neurological Institute (MNI), the location of active contacts and the volume of tissue activated (VTA) were calculated. Results: patient evaluations took place preoperatively and follow-ups took place at 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months. The average patient improvement rates for HAM-A and HAM-D scores at the 6-month follow-up were 41.7% [interquartile range (IQR) 34.9%] and 37.5% (IQR 33.4%), respectively (both p < 0.001). In medication-off, there were negative correlations between the HAM-A improvement rate and the Z-axis coordinate of the active contact (left side: r = −0.308, p = 0.020; right side: r = −0.390, p = 0.003), and negative correlations between the HAM-D improvement rate and the Z-axis coordinate of the active contact (left side: r = −0.345, p = 0.009; right side: r = −0.521, p = 0.001). There were positive correlations between the HAM-A and HAM-D scores improvement rate at 6 months after surgery and bilateral VTA in the right STN limbic subregion (HAM-A: r = 0.314, p = 0.018; HAM-D: r = 0.321, p = 0.015). Conclusion: bilateral STN-DBS can improve anxiety and depression symptoms in PD patients. The closer the stimulation to the ventral limbic region of the STN, the more significant the improvement in anxiety and depression symptoms of PD patients.
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) | 0.000 | 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".