MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4307918777 · doi:10.1002/mdc3.13609

Functional Movement Disorders and Deep Brain Stimulation: A Multi‐Center Study

2022· article· en· W4307918777 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueMovement Disorders Clinical Practice · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPsychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments
Canadian institutionsOntario Brain InstituteToronto Western HospitalUniversity of TorontoCentre for Movement Disorders
FundersSunovionH. Lundbeck A/SColorado Clinical and Translational Sciences InstituteCentro de Investigación Biomédica en Red sobre Enfermedades NeurodegenerativasIpsenMichael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson's ResearchBoston Scientific CorporationUCB PharmaTeva Pharmaceutical IndustriesLeids Universitair Medisch CentrumUniversity of TorontoAcorda TherapeuticsParkinson's FoundationVanderbilt UniversityUniversidad de SevillaUniversity of CambridgeUniversity of Colorado School of Medicine, Anschutz Medical CampusMultiple System Atrophy CoalitionParkinson AllianceAllerganNational Institutes of HealthUniversity of FloridaItalfarmacoBachmann-Strauss Dystonia and Parkinson Foundation
KeywordsDeep brain stimulationMovement disordersMedicineDystoniaCohortComorbidityEssential tremorParkinson's diseaseDiseaseInternal medicinePhysical medicine and rehabilitationPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Functional movement disorders (FMD) are a commonly under-recognized diagnosis in patients with underlying neurodegenerative diseases. FMD have been observed in patients undergoing deep brain stimulation (DBS) for Parkinson's disease (PD) and other movement disorders. The prevalence of coexisting FMD among movement disorder-related DBS patients is unknown, and it may occur more often than previously recognized. Methods: We retrospectively assessed the relative prevalence and clinical characteristics of FMD occurring post-DBS, in PD and dystonia patients (FMD+, n = 29). We compared this cohort with age at surgery-, sex-, and diagnosis-matched subjects without FMD post-DBS (FMD-, n = 29). Results: Both the FMD prevalence (0.2%-2.1%) and the number of cases/DBS procedures/year varied across centers (0.15-3.65). A total of nine of 29 FMD+ cases reported worse outcomes following DBS. Although FMD+ and FMD- manifested similar features, FMD+ showed higher psychiatric comorbidity. Conclusions: DBS may be complicated by the development of FMD in a subset of patients, particularly those with pre-morbid psychiatric conditions.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.080
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.337 · 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