ArticlemedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences2025
Evaluation of DBS computational modeling methodologies using in-vivo electrophysiology in Parkinson's disease.
Article in medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Deep brain stimulation (DBS) is an effective therapy for Parkinson's disease (PD) and other neuropsychiatric disorders, but its outcomes vary due to differences in patient selection, electrode placement, and programming. Optimizing DBS parameter settings requires postoperative adjustments through a trial-and-error process, which is complex and time-consuming. As such, researchers have been developing patient-specific computational models to help guide DBS programming. Despite growing interest in image-guided DBS technology, and recent adoption into clinical practice, the direct validation of the prediction accuracy remains limited. The objective of this study was to establish a comparative framework for validating the accuracy of various DBS computational modeling methodologies in predicting the activation of clinically relevant pathways using in vivo measurements from PD patients undergoing subthalamic (STN) DBS surgery. Our prior work assessed the accuracy of driving force (DF) models in native space by predicting activation of the corticospinal/bulbar tract (CSBT) and cortico-subthalamic hyperdirect pathway (HDP) using very short- (<2 ms) and short-latency (2-4 ms) cortical evoked potentials (cEPs). In this study, we extended our previous work by comparing the accuracy of five computational modeling variations for predicting the activation of HDP and CSBT based on three key factors: modeling method (DF vs. Volume of Tissue Activated [VTA]), imaging space (native vs. normative), and anatomical representation (pathway vs. volume). The model performances were quantified using the coefficient of determination (R
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.