Behavioural and neurophysiological responses to written naming treatment and high definition tDCS: a case study in advanced primary progressive aphasia
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: Primary progressive aphasia (PPA) is associated with progressive loss of language functions in the context of irreversible neurodegeneration, for which there is no cure. Speech-language therapy can help preserve language abilities, and most promisingly, interventions like transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) have been shown to augment the effectiveness of therapy. However, the underlying mechanism for this enhancement is unknown.Objectives: We evaluated the behavioural and physiological (using resting-state magnetoencephalography [rsMEG]) effects of contemporary naming treatment provided with tDCS in a patient with an advanced case of nonfluent variant PPA (P01; 67 year old male). P01 was mute but had preserved written abilities, which we aimed to enhance with written naming therapy and excitatory or anodal-tDCS. We hypothesized greater improvement in written performance, particularly immediate gains, maintenance, and generalization, after anodal- than sham-tDCS. Additionally, reductions in oscillatory abnormal activity, as indicated by rsMEG, were expected after repeated sessions of anodal-tDCS with the naming treatment.Methods: A written picture naming therapy was paired with five sessions of anodal and five sessions of sham high-definition tDCS over two weeks. Anatomical and neurophysiological abnormalities were mapped with structural-MRI and rsMEG, respectively. TDCS was targeted towards an anatomically intact left supramarginal gyrus. The therapy-induced changes in written performance were evaluated on both trained and untrained pictures using Levenshtein Distances (LD). The neurophysiological changes were evaluated by comparing spectral relative power estimates in frequency bands ranging from delta to low-gamma (1–50 Hz), before and after therapy. All evaluations were completed immediately after therapy with sham- and anodal-tDCS, and at a 3-month follow-up.Results: Compared to sham-tDCS, anodal-tDCS augmented the immediate therapy-induced gains on trained items, as indicated by reductions in LD scores, reflecting improvement in written performance, particularly for more difficult target words. Neural activity at the stimulation spot and in surrounding and remote regions exhibited reduced oscillatory slowing, both immediately after one session (short-term) and after completion of five sessions (long-term) of anodal-tDCS compared to sham-tDCS. This is manifested as decreased theta (1–4 Hz) and increased beta and low-gamma (15–50 Hz) power. No additional gains with anodal-tDCS were found on untrained items (generalization) or at 3-month follow-up (maintenance).Conclusions: Our findings suggest that five sessions of anodal-tDCS can improve written performance by partially reversing abnormal neural activity and thus boosting the functional capacity of the structurally intact cortex. Longer duration of treatment may be needed for additional gains in maintenance and generalization with anodal-tDCS.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».