MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1977921454 · doi:10.1016/s0924-9338(11)72850-4

Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (rTMS) in the Treatment of Medication-Resistant Neuropatic Pain

2011· article· en· W1977921454 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Monika Klírová, Jitka Fricová, P. Šóš, Tomáš Novák, B. Kohútová, Václav Masopust, M. Haeckel, Richard Rokyta

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Psychiatry · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPain Mechanisms and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTranscranial magnetic stimulationPsychologyVisual analogue scaleSensationMcGill Pain QuestionnaireAnesthesiaMedicineSpinothalamic tractStimulationAudiologyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationNeuroscienceNociceptionInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is a non-invasive method that induces functional changes in a relatively small area of the cerebral cortex. It is supposed that the effect of the method in therapy of neuropatic pain is based on the induction of spinothalamic tract inhibiton, which leads to the symptom withdrawal. Aim To prove the clinical and electrophysiological effect of rTMS in the therapy of chronic neuropatic pain. Methods 29 patients with medication-resistant neuropatic pain were examined by Visual analog scale (VAS), McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ) and QST(Quantitative sensory Testing, consisted of von Frey and thermic treshold examination),then treated by high frequency rTMS in the study using double-blind randomized sham-controlled parallel design. rTMS parameters: 5 rTMS sessions (2 weeks treatment), where each session consisted of three 10 Hz rTMS series using: 1) 85%MT (motor treshold), 2) 90%MT and 3) 95%MT. Each rTMS série consisted of 20 pulses in 12 trains. Location of the active coil was administered over the contralateral motor cortex, directed specifically to facial area of homunculus (according to funcional location). Sham coil was angled 90° degrees away from the skull. Results Confirmation of a significant decrease of VAS item in active group, trend to improvement in tactile sensation of severed patient faces. The changes of thermic treshold were not found. Sham rTMS did not show any trend for improvement. Conclusion Although no general recommendations can be drawn based on our result, our study is another one that suggest rTMS should be considered as an effective and safe treatment option for chronic neuropatic pain.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.391
Threshold uncertainty score0.363

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.226 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean PsychiatrySame topicPain Mechanisms and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207