Naturalistic Study of the use of Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation in the Treatment of Depressive Relapse
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
BACKGROUND: The efficacy of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) in the treatment of depression has been assessed in a number of acute treatment trials during the last 10 years. Little is known about the long-term impact of the treatment on the disorder and its effectiveness when applied for repeated relapses of depression over time. METHOD: Nineteen patients who had previously responded to rTMS in clinical trials received treatment with rTMS for a total of 30 episodes of depressive relapse. RESULTS: Approximately 10 months elapsed between treatment episodes. The majority of patients achieved a significant improvement in each treatment course with significant improvements achieved in patients treated with both low-frequency right-sided rTMS and high-frequency left-sided rTMS. CONCLUSIONS: The study suggests that rTMS may have value in the treatment of episodes of depressive relapse with little reduction in efficacy over time.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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