MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394724804 · doi:10.1038/s41398-023-02727-5

Systematic review of rodent studies of deep brain stimulation for the treatment of neurological, developmental and neuropsychiatric disorders

2024· review· en· W4394724804 on OpenAlexafffund
Kristina K. Zhang, Rafi Matin, Carolina Gorodetsky, George M. Ibrahim, Flavia Venetucci Gouveia

Bibliographic record

VenueTranslational Psychiatry · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeurological disorders and treatments
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchGovernment of CanadaFondation Brain Canada
KeywordsDeep brain stimulationNeurosciencePsychologyDopaminergicBrain stimulationMonoamine neurotransmitterMovement disordersSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)DiseaseStimulationPsychiatryMedicineParkinson's diseaseDopamineSerotonin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Deep brain stimulation (DBS) modulates local and widespread connectivity in dysfunctional networks. Positive results are observed in several patient populations; however, the precise mechanisms underlying treatment remain unknown. Translational DBS studies aim to answer these questions and provide knowledge for advancing the field. Here, we systematically review the literature on DBS studies involving models of neurological, developmental and neuropsychiatric disorders to provide a synthesis of the current scientific landscape surrounding this topic. A systematic analysis of the literature was performed following PRISMA guidelines. 407 original articles were included. Data extraction focused on study characteristics, including stimulation protocol, behavioural outcomes, and mechanisms of action. The number of articles published increased over the years, including 16 rat models and 13 mouse models of transgenic or healthy animals exposed to external factors to induce symptoms. Most studies targeted telencephalic structures with varying stimulation settings. Positive behavioural outcomes were reported in 85.8% of the included studies. In models of psychiatric and neurodevelopmental disorders, DBS-induced effects were associated with changes in monoamines and neuronal activity along the mesocorticolimbic circuit. For movement disorders, DBS improves symptoms via modulation of the striatal dopaminergic system. In dementia and epilepsy models, changes to cellular and molecular aspects of the hippocampus were shown to underlie symptom improvement. Despite limitations in translating findings from preclinical to clinical settings, rodent studies have contributed substantially to our current knowledge of the pathophysiology of disease and DBS mechanisms. Direct inhibition/excitation of neural activity, whereby DBS modulates pathological oscillatory activity within brain networks, is among the major theories of its mechanism. However, there remain fundamental questions on mechanisms, optimal targets and parameters that need to be better understood to improve this therapy and provide more individualized treatment according to the patient's predominant symptoms.

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 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: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.154
Threshold uncertainty score0.724

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.374
Teacher spread0.318 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations24
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTranslational PsychiatrySame topicNeurological disorders and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207