A Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Study of the Effects of Low Frequency Right Prefrontal Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation in Depression
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The study aimed to explore the biological effects of low-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (LFR-TMS) treatment applied to the right prefrontal cortex, comparing this with the effects of high-frequency left-sided (HFL-TMS) in patients with treatment-resistant depression. Twenty-six patients with treatment-resistant depression were randomized to receive either daily LFR-TMS or HFL-TMS treatment for 3 weeks and underwent functional magnetic resonance imaging during a planning task before and after treatment. Patients responded clinically to both forms of treatment with no difference in the degree of response (F1,24 = 0.65;P > 0.05). Low-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation resulted in no overall change in task-related activation. However, responders to LFR-TMS demonstrated a bilateral decrease in activity in middle frontal gyrus. In contrast, HFL-TMS produced an increase in activation in left precuneus with responders showing increased activation in several additional regions. Response to LFR-TMS is associated with a bilateral reduction in frontal activation that does not seem to be a nonspecific effect of treatment and differs from the response to HFL-TMS.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it