MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6957518029 · doi:10.60692/c5c86-3ja44

Levodopa Versus Dopamine Agonist after Subthalamic Stimulation in Parkinson's Disease

2020· article· en· W6957518029 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueGreater South Information System · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHeat Transfer and Numerical Methods
Canadian institutionsKrembil FoundationUniversity of TorontoToronto Western Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLevodopaAgonistDopamine agonistDopamineApathyDeep brain stimulationStimulationDopamine receptor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

No clinical trials have been specifically designed to compare medical treatments after surgery in Parkinson's disease (PD).Study's objective was to compare the efficacy and safety of levodopa versus dopamine agonist monotherapy after deep brain stimulation (DBS) in PD.Thirty-five surgical candidates were randomly assigned to receive postoperative monotherapy with either levodopa or dopamine agonist in a randomized, single-blind study. All patients were reevaluated in short- (3 months), mid- (6 months), and long-term (2.5 years) follow-up after surgery. The primary outcome measure was the change in the Non-Motor Symptoms Scale (NMSS) 3 months after surgery. Secondary outcome measures were the percentage of patients maintaining monotherapy, change in motor symptoms, and specific non-motor symptoms (NMS). Analysis was performed primarily in the intention-to-treat population.Randomization did not significantly affect the primary outcome (difference in NMSS between treatment groups was 4.88 [95% confidence interval: -11.78-21.53, P = 0.566]). In short- and mid-term follow-up, monotherapy was safe and feasible in more than half of patients (60% in short- and 51.5% in mid-term follow-up), but it was more often possible for patients on levodopa. The ability to maintain dopamine agonist monotherapy was related to optimal contact location. In the long term, levodopa monotherapy was feasible only in a minority of patients (34.2%), whereas dopamine agonist monotherapy was not tolerated due to worsening of motor conditions or occurrence of impulse control disorders.This trial provides evidence for simplifying pharmacological treatment after functional neurosurgery for PD. The reduction in dopamine receptor agonists should be attempted while monitoring for occurrence of NMSs, such as apathy and sleep disturbances. © 2020 The Authors. Movement Disorders published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.189 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGreater South Information SystemSame topicHeat Transfer and Numerical MethodsFrench-language works237,207