In 2020, the Guidelines Task Force conducted another systematic review of the relevant literature on deep brain stimulation (DBS) for obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) to update the original 2014 guidelines to ensure timeliness and accuracy for clinical practice.
To conduct a systematic review of the literature and update the evidence-based guidelines on DBS for OCD.
The Guidelines Task Force conducted another systematic review of the relevant literature, using the same search terms and strategies as used to search PubMed and Embase for relevant literature. The updated search included studies published between 1966 and December 2019. The same inclusion/exclusion criteria as the original guideline were also applied. Abstracts were reviewed and relevant full-text articles were retrieved and graded. Of 864 articles, 10 were retrieved for full-text review and analysis. Recommendations were updated according to new evidence yielded by this update.
Seven studies were included in the original guideline, reporting the use of bilateral DBS as more effective in improving OCD symptoms than sham treatment. An additional 10 studies were included in this update: 1 class II and 9 class III.
Based on the data published in the literature, the following recommendations can be made: (1) It is recommended that clinicians utilize bilateral subthalamic nucleus DBS over best medical management for the treatment of patients with medically refractory OCD (level I). (2) Clinicians may use bilateral nucleus accumbens or bed nucleus of stria terminalis DBS for the treatment of patients with medically refractory OCD (level II). There is insufficient evidence to make a recommendation for the identification of the most effective target.The full guidelines can be accessed at https://www.cns.org/guidelines/browse-guidelines-detail/deep-brain-stimulation-obsessive-compulsive-disord.

The false consensus effect (FCE), the tendency to project our attitudes and opinions on to others, is a pervasive bias in social reasoning with a range of ramifications for individuals and society. Research in social psychology has suggested that numerous factors (anchoring and adjustment, accessibility, motivated projection, etc.) may contribute to the FCE. In this study, we examine the neural correlates of the FCE and provide evidence that motivated projection plays a significant role. Activity in reward regions (ventromedial pFC and bilateral nucleus accumbens) during consensus estimation was positively associated with bias, whereas activity in right ventrolateral pFC (implicated in emotion regulation) was inversely associated with bias. Activity in reward and regulatory regions accounted for half of the total variation in consensus bias across participants (R2 = .503). This research complements models of the FCE in social psychology, providing a glimpse into the neural mechanisms underlying this important phenomenon.