MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393951118 · doi:10.1016/j.neurot.2024.e00348

Neuroscience fundamentals relevant to neuromodulation: Neurobiology of deep brain stimulation in Parkinson's disease

2024· article· en· W4393951118 on OpenAlex
Benjamin Davidson, Luka Milosevic, Laura Kondrataviciute, Lorraine V. Kalia, Suneil K. Kalia

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueNeurotherapeutics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeurological disorders and treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeep brain stimulationNeuroscienceNeuromodulationSubthalamic nucleusParkinson's diseaseContext (archaeology)NeurologyPsychologyDiseaseMedicineBiologyStimulationPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Deep Brain Stimulation (DBS) has become a pivotal therapeutic approach for Parkinson's Disease (PD) and various neuropsychiatric conditions, impacting over 200,000 patients. Despite its widespread application, the intricate mechanisms behind DBS remain a subject of ongoing investigation. This article provides an overview of the current knowledge surrounding the local, circuit, and neurobiochemical effects of DBS, focusing on the subthalamic nucleus (STN) as a key target in PD management. The local effects of DBS, once thought to mimic a reversible lesion, now reveal a more nuanced interplay with myelinated axons, neurotransmitter release, and the surrounding microenvironment. Circuit effects illuminate the modulation of oscillatory activities within the basal ganglia and emphasize communication between the STN and the primary motor cortex. Neurobiochemical effects, encompassing changes in dopamine levels and epigenetic modifications, add further complexity to the DBS landscape. Finally, within the context of understanding the mechanisms of DBS in PD, the article highlights the controversial question of whether DBS exerts disease-modifying effects in PD. While preclinical evidence suggests neuroprotective potential, clinical trials such as EARLYSTIM face challenges in assessing long-term disease modification due to enrollment timing and methodology limitations. The discussion underscores the need for robust biomarkers and large-scale prospective trials to conclusively determine DBS's potential as a disease-modifying therapy in PD.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.290
Threshold uncertainty score0.565

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.285 · 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