↓ Skip to main content

Efficacy and Safety of Deep Brain Stimulation in Tourette Syndrome: The International Tourette Syndrome Deep Brain Stimulation Public Database and Registry

Overview of attention for article published in JAMA Neurology, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
195 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
229 Mendeley
Title
Efficacy and Safety of Deep Brain Stimulation in Tourette Syndrome: The International Tourette Syndrome Deep Brain Stimulation Public Database and Registry
Published in
JAMA Neurology, March 2018
DOI 10.1001/jamaneurol.2017.4317
Pubmed ID
Authors

Daniel Martinez-Ramirez, Joohi Jimenez-Shahed, James Frederick Leckman, Mauro Porta, Domenico Servello, Fan-Gang Meng, Jens Kuhn, Daniel Huys, Juan Carlos Baldermann, Thomas Foltynie, Marwan I. Hariz, Eileen M. Joyce, Ludvic Zrinzo, Zinovia Kefalopoulou, Peter Silburn, Terry Coyne, Alon Y. Mogilner, Michael H. Pourfar, Suketu M. Khandhar, Man Auyeung, Jill Louise Ostrem, Veerle Visser-Vandewalle, Marie-Laure Welter, Luc Mallet, Carine Karachi, Jean Luc Houeto, Bryan Timothy Klassen, Linda Ackermans, Takanobu Kaido, Yasin Temel, Robert E. Gross, Harrison C. Walker, Andres M. Lozano, Benjamin L. Walter, Zoltan Mari, William S. Anderson, Barbara Kelly Changizi, Elena Moro, Sarah Elizabeth Zauber, Lauren E. Schrock, Jian-Guo Zhang, Wei Hu, Kyle Rizer, Erin H. Monari, Kelly D. Foote, Irene A. Malaty, Wissam Deeb, Aysegul Gunduz, Michael S. Okun

Abstract

Collective evidence has strongly suggested that deep brain stimulation (DBS) is a promising therapy for Tourette syndrome. To assess the efficacy and safety of DBS in a multinational cohort of patients with Tourette syndrome. The prospective International Deep Brain Stimulation Database and Registry included 185 patients with medically refractory Tourette syndrome who underwent DBS implantation from January 1, 2012, to December 31, 2016, at 31 institutions in 10 countries worldwide. Patients with medically refractory symptoms received DBS implantation in the centromedian thalamic region (93 of 163 [57.1%]), the anterior globus pallidus internus (41 of 163 [25.2%]), the posterior globus pallidus internus (25 of 163 [15.3%]), and the anterior limb of the internal capsule (4 of 163 [2.5%]). Scores on the Yale Global Tic Severity Scale and adverse events. The International Deep Brain Stimulation Database and Registry enrolled 185 patients (of 171 with available data, 37 females and 134 males; mean [SD] age at surgery, 29.1 [10.8] years [range, 13-58 years]). Symptoms of obsessive-compulsive disorder were present in 97 of 151 patients (64.2%) and 32 of 148 (21.6%) had a history of self-injurious behavior. The mean (SD) total Yale Global Tic Severity Scale score improved from 75.01 (18.36) at baseline to 41.19 (20.00) at 1 year after DBS implantation (P < .001). The mean (SD) motor tic subscore improved from 21.00 (3.72) at baseline to 12.97 (5.58) after 1 year (P < .001), and the mean (SD) phonic tic subscore improved from 16.82 (6.56) at baseline to 9.63 (6.99) at 1 year (P < .001). The overall adverse event rate was 35.4% (56 of 158 patients), with intracranial hemorrhage occurring in 2 patients (1.3%), infection in 4 patients with 5 events (3.2%), and lead explantation in 1 patient (0.6%). The most common stimulation-induced adverse effects were dysarthria (10 [6.3%]) and paresthesia (13 [8.2%]). Deep brain stimulation was associated with symptomatic improvement in patients with Tourette syndrome but also with important adverse events. A publicly available website on outcomes of DBS in patients with Tourette syndrome has been provided.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 97 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 229 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 229 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 28 12%
Other 25 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 10%
Student > Bachelor 24 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 15 7%
Other 44 19%
Unknown 69 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 56 24%
Neuroscience 32 14%
Psychology 13 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 2%
Other 27 12%
Unknown 90 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 612. 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 18 March 2021.
All research outputs
#36,787
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from JAMA Neurology
#68
of 5,847 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#849
of 344,853 outputs
Outputs of similar age from JAMA Neurology
#3
of 65 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,847 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 44.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 344,853 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 65 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.