↓ Skip to main content

The site of stimulation moderates neuropsychiatric symptoms after subthalamic deep brain stimulation for Parkinson's disease

Overview of attention for article published in NeuroImage: Clinical, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
17 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
56 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
128 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The site of stimulation moderates neuropsychiatric symptoms after subthalamic deep brain stimulation for Parkinson's disease
Published in
NeuroImage: Clinical, March 2018
DOI 10.1016/j.nicl.2018.03.009
Pubmed ID
Authors

Philip E. Mosley, David Smith, Terry Coyne, Peter Silburn, Michael Breakspear, Alistair Perry

Abstract

Deep brain stimulation of the subthalamic nucleus for Parkinson's disease is an established advanced therapy that addresses motor symptoms and improves quality of life. However, it has also been associated with neuropsychiatric symptoms such as impulsivity and hypomania. When significant, these symptoms can be distressing, necessitating psychiatric intervention. However, a comprehensive analysis of neurocognitive and neuropsychiatric outcomes with reference to the site of subthalamic stimulation has not been undertaken. We examined this matter in a consecutive sample of 64 persons with Parkinson's disease undertaking subthalamic deep brain stimulation. Participants were assessed with a battery of neuropsychiatric instruments at baseline and at repeated postoperative intervals. A psychiatrist identified patients with emergent, clinically-significant symptoms due to stimulation. The site of the active electrode contact and a simulated volume of activated tissue were evaluated with reference to putative limbic, associative and motor subregions of the subthalamic nucleus. We studied anatomical correlates of longitudinal neuropsychiatric change and delineated specific subthalamic regions associated with neuropsychiatric impairment. We tested the ability of these data to predict clinically-significant symptoms. Subthalamic stimulation within the right associative subregion was associated with inhibitory errors on the Excluded Letter Fluency task at 6-weeks (p = 0.023) and 13-weeks postoperatively (p = 0.0017). A cluster of subthalamic voxels associated with inhibitory errors was identified in the right associative and motor subregions. At 6-weeks, clinically-significant neuropsychiatric symptoms were associated with the distance of the active contact to the right associative subregion (p = 0.0026) and stimulation within the right associative subregion (p = 0.0009). At 13-weeks, clinically-significant symptoms were associated with the distance to the right (p = 0.0027) and left (p = 0.0084) associative subregions and stimulation within the right associative subregion (p = 0.0026). Discrete clusters of subthalamic voxels associated with high and low likelihood of postoperative neuropsychiatric symptoms were identified in ventromedial and dorsolateral zones, respectively. When a classifier was trained on these data, clinically-significant symptoms were predicted with an accuracy of 79%. These data underscore the importance of accurate electrode targeting, contact selection and device programming to reduce postoperative neuropsychiatric impairment. The ability to predict neuropsychiatric symptoms based on subthalamic data may permit anticipation and prevention of these occurrences, improving safety and tolerability.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 17 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 128 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 128 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 26 20%
Researcher 19 15%
Student > Master 16 13%
Student > Bachelor 11 9%
Other 8 6%
Other 17 13%
Unknown 31 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 23 18%
Medicine and Dentistry 20 16%
Psychology 12 9%
Engineering 9 7%
Computer Science 4 3%
Other 13 10%
Unknown 47 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 August 2022.
All research outputs
#3,772,095
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from NeuroImage: Clinical
#703
of 2,802 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#74,751
of 351,846 outputs
Outputs of similar age from NeuroImage: Clinical
#35
of 118 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,802 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 351,846 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 118 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.