ArticleAJOB neuroscience
Exploring Patient Perspectives: A Structured Interview Study on Deep Brain Stimulation as a Novel Treatment Approach for Mild Cognitive Impairment.
Article in AJOB neuroscience. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionLimited treatments for Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) highlight the need to explore innovations including Deep Brain Stimulation (DBS), with patient perspectives key to ethical protocol development.
methodsSeven MCI patients and four care partners were interviewed (Feb 2023-Jan 2024) about daily MCI challenges, desired treatment outcomes, and views on DBS. Thematic analysis following COREQ guidelines identified key themes.
resultsDBS was a novel concept for all (7/7), and most expressed interest (6/7) despite concerns about invasiveness (6/7) and preference to exhaust medications first (4/7). Care partners (4/4) shared concerns about invasiveness and emphasized proven efficacy. Key deciding factors included the involved procedural risk (6/7), desired significant outcomes (6/7), and prior testing for MCI (7/7). Most participants (6/7) were hesitant to be the first to try DBS, while one was willing.
conclusionPatient and care partner insights on DBS for MCI are crucial for balancing innovation with ethical, patient-centered research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39739372What 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.