ArticleCambridge quarterly of healthcare ethics : CQ : the international journal of healthcare ethics committees2020
Pediatric Deep Brain Stimulation for Dystonia: Current State and Ethical Considerations.
Article in Cambridge quarterly of healthcare ethics : CQ : the international journal of healthcare ethics committees, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Participant perceptions of changes in psychosocial domains following participation in an adaptive deep brain stimulation trial.Brain stimulationTrial
- Deep brain stimulation for pediatric dystonia under general anesthesia with endotracheal intubation: case series in a tertiary hospital.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2026Article
- Current Neuroethical Perspectives on Deep Brain Stimulation and Neuromodulation for Neuropsychiatric Disorders: A Scoping Review of the Past 10 Years.Diseases (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Hope and Optimism in Pediatric Deep Brain Stimulation: Key Stakeholder Perspectives.Neuroethics · 2023Article
- Call for moral recognition as part of paediatric assent.Journal of medical ethics · 2023Article
- Deep Brain Stimulation for Pediatric Dystonia: Clinicians' Perspectives on the Most Pressing Ethical Challenges.Stereotactic and functional neurosurgery · 2023Article
- Perceptions of Deep Brain Stimulation for Adolescents with Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder.Journal of child and adolescent psychopharmacology · 2021Article
- Neuromodulation for pediatric disorders of consciousness: bridging the gap between adult evidence and developmental reality.Frontiers in neurologyReview
- Pressing ethical issues in considering pediatric deep brain stimulation for obsessive-compulsive disorder.Brain stimulationArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Dystonia is a movement disorder that can have a debilitating impact on motor functions and quality of life. There are 250,000 cases in the United States, most with childhood onset. Due to the limited effectiveness and side effects of available treatments, pediatric deep brain stimulation (pDBS) has emerged as an intervention for refractory dystonia. However, there is limited clinical and neuroethics research in this area of clinical practice. This paper examines whether it is ethically justified to offer pDBS to children with refractory dystonia. Given the favorable risk-benefit profile, it is concluded that offering pDBS is ethically justified for certain etiologies of dystonia, but it is less clear for others. In addition, various ethical and policy concerns are discussed, which need to be addressed to optimize the practice of offering pDBS for dystonia. Strategies are proposed to help address these concerns as pDBS continues to expand.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.