Research overview
The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by
Parkinson's disease (PD) is a progressive neurodegenerative disorder marked by motor and non-motor dysfunctions that severely compromise patients' quality of life. While pharmacological treatments provide symptomatic relief in the early stages, advanced PD often requires neurosurgical interventions, such as deep brain stimulation (DBS) and focused ultrasound (FUS), for effective symptom management. A significant challenge in optimizing these therapeutic strategies is the early identification and recruitment of suitable candidates for clinical trials. This review explores the role of artificial intelligence (AI) in advancing neurosurgical and neuroscience interventions for PD, highlighting the ways in which AI-driven platforms are transforming clinical trial design and patient selection. Machine learning (ML) algorithms and big data analytics enable precise patient stratification, risk assessment, and outcome prediction, accelerating the development of novel therapeutic approaches. These innovations improve trial efficiency, broaden treatment options, and enhance patient outcomes. However, integrating AI into clinical trial frameworks presents challenges such as data standardization, regulatory hurdles, and the need for extensive validation. Addressing these obstacles will require collaboration among neurosurgeons, neuroscientists, AI specialists, and regulatory bodies to establish ethical and effective guidelines for AI-driven technologies in PD neurosurgical research. This paper emphasizes the transformative potential of AI and technological innovation in shaping the future of PD neurosurgery, ultimately enhancing therapeutic efficacy and patient care.
Scientific assessment
Research question
Assess the question within the original study’s scope.
Methods & sample
Check the source article for study design and sample details.
Key findings
An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.
Limitations
Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.
Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.