ArticleTremor and other hyperkinetic movements (New York, N.Y.)2025
Deep Brain Stimulation for Dystonia in the Netherlands: A Delphi Study to Develop National Consensus.
Article in Tremor and other hyperkinetic movements (New York, N.Y.), 2025. 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.
- Deep brain stimulation in children with acquired dystonia.Frontiers in neurologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Predicting outcome for individuals with dystonia undergoing treatment with deep brain stimulation (DBS) remains challenging. This is further complicated by a lack of uniform screening, follow-up, and heterogeneous outcome measures. This study aims to achieve consensus on a national level among experts in the field to develop an agreed set of outcome measures and introduce more uniformity in the process of preoperative screening and follow-up. Methods: A modified Delphi process was conducted among experts in the field of DBS for dystonia. The process consisted of an inventory round, followed by two rounds of Delphi questionnaires, closing with a digital consensus meeting. Experts rated the importance of items within several categories: ((non-)motor symptoms, selection criteria, follow-up, DBS-related aspects, involved care providers). A threshold of 70% was maintained as consensus criterium. Results: After the first two rounds, consensus was reached on 40/59 items (adult DBS), and 47/61 items (pediatric DBS). The remaining items were rephrased into 28 statements (13 adult DBS, 13 pediatric DBS, and 2 concerning both) and voted on during a final consensus meeting. There, 23/28 statements (11 adult, 11 pediatric, 1 both) reached consensus. Overall, after three rounds, on most items consensus was reached. Discussion: In this Delphi study, a high level of consensus among national experts was achieved on outcome measures and the process of screening and follow-up in DBS for dystonia for adults and children. The results present national consensus and offer an excellent start for collaborative international studies on best practice for DBS in dystonia.
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.