SynthesisNeurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology2023
Efficacy of short pulse and conventional deep brain stimulation in Parkinson's disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Deep brain stimulation for freezing of gait in Parkinson's disease: An updated systematic review, meta-analysis, and a single-center clinical experience.Neurosurgical review · 2026Pooled it
- Considering a new clinical presentation of the anti-Tr/DNER antibody-associated cerebellar ataxia.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDeep brain stimulation (DBS) is a common treatment for Parkinson's disease. However, the clinical efficacy of short pulse width DBS (spDBS) compared with conventional DBS (cDBS) is still unknown.
objectiveThis meta-analysis investigated the effectiveness of spDBS versus cDBS in patients with PD.
methodsFour databases (PubMed, Cochrane, Web of Science, and Embase) were independently searched until October 2021 by two reviewers. We utilized the following scales and items: therapeutic windows (TW), efficacy threshold, side effect threshold, Movement Disorder Society-Sponsored Revision Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS) part III off-medication score, Speech Intelligence Test (SIT), and Freezing of Gait Questionnaire (FOG-Q).
resultsThe analysis included seven studies with a total of 87 patients. The results indicated that spDBS significantly widened the therapeutic windows (0.99, 95% CI = 0.61 to 1.38) while increasing the threshold amplitudes of side effects (2.25, 95% CI = 1.69 to 2.81) and threshold amplitudes of effects (1.60, 95% CI = 0.84 to 2.36). There was no statistically significant difference in UPDRS part III, SIT, and FOG-Q scores between spDBS and cDBS groups, suggesting that treatment with both cDBS and spDBS may result in similar effects of improved dysarthria and gait disorders.
conclusionsCompared with cDBS, spDBS is effective in expanding TW. Both types of deep brain stimulation resulted in improved gait disorders and speech intelligibility.
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.