Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation to Understand the Pathophysiology and Treatment of Substance Use Disorders
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
Recent studies support an association between substance use disorders (SUDs) and cortical excitability. Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is a non-invasive tool that can be used to assess cortical physiological processes (e.g., inhibition, excitation) and has proven to be a useful diagnostic tool in brain disorders associated with alterations in cortical excitability. In this manuscript, we review studies that employ TMS to evaluate cortical excitability in patients with SUDs. Furthermore, we discuss preliminary studies that examine repetitive TMS (rTMS) as a potential treatment for patients with SUDs. Although the use of TMS to evaluate and to treat those individuals with SUDs is in its early stages, these studies reveal significant alterations in both cortical inhibition and excitation. Specifically, elevated cortical inhibition was reported in both cocaine and nicotine dependent individuals, while one study demonstrated an increase in cortical excitability in those who use 3, 4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA). Furthermore, three studies examining rTMS as a potential treatment in cocaine and nicotine addiction report decreases in the level of cravings and in the number of cigarettes smoked following rTMS administration to the dorsal lateral prefrontal cortex. Thus, TMS has provided early interesting findings vis à vis cortical excitability in SUDs. Moreover, preliminary evidence suggests that rTMS is efficacious in the treatment of cocaine and nicotine addiction. Further work is needed to enhance our understanding of the altered neurophysiology in SUDs as well as the ways in which rTMS treatment can be directed to optimize treatment.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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