Changes in Mindfulness following Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation for Mood Disorders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Mindfulness practices are associated with changes in different cortical regions, including the dorsolateral prefrontal cortices (DLPFCs). Our study sought to examine how an index course of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) over the DLPFC improved components of mindfulness as assessed by Baer's Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire (FFMQ) and the Experience Questionnaire (EQ). METHOD: Our preliminary study is a retrospective chart review of 32 patients who had undergone an index course of rTMS for major depressive episode between 2009 and 2012. The following information was collected prior to rTMS: patient demographics, diagnosis, and age of onset of primary diagnosis. The following information was collected prior to and after rTMS: 21-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD) scores, Patient-Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) scores, Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7-item (GAD-7) scale scores, FFMQ scores, and EQ scores. RESULTS: Following rTMS, results showed statistically significant decreases in HRSD, PHQ-9, and GAD-7 scores. There was significant improvement in the nonreactivity to inner experience subscale of the BFFMQ and in the decentring subscale of the EQ. Subgroup analysis between patients who did not improve on the HRSD by 50% or more following rTMS and those who did revealed no baseline difference in mindfulness. There was significant improvement in the decentring subscale of the EQ in both subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: Our study provides preliminary data that rTMS may be associated with improvement in some components of mindfulness, independently of changes in depression.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".