Cognitive Effects of High-Frequency rTMS in Schizophrenia Patients With Predominant Negative Symptoms: Results From a Multicenter Randomized Sham-Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cognitive impairments are one of the main contributors to disability and poor long-term outcome in schizophrenia. Proof-of-concept trials indicate that repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) applied to the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) has the potential to improve cognitive functioning. We analyzed the effects of 10-Hz rTMS to the left DLPFC on cognitive deficits in schizophrenia in a large-scale and multicenter, sham-controlled study. A total of 156 schizophrenia patients with predominant negative symptoms were randomly assigned to a 3-week intervention (10-Hz rTMS, 15 sessions, 1000 stimuli per session) with either active or sham rTMS. The Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test, Trail Making Test A and B, Wisconsin Card Sorting Test, Digit Span Test, and the Regensburg Word Fluency Test were administered before intervention and at day 21, 45, and 105 follow-up. From the test results, a neuropsychological composite score was computed. Both groups showed no differences in any of the outcome variables before and after intervention. Both groups improved markedly over time, but effect sizes indicate a numeric, but nonsignificant superiority of active rTMS in certain cognitive tests. Active 10-Hz rTMS applied to the left DLPFC for 3 weeks was not superior to sham rTMS in the improvement of various cognitive domains in schizophrenia patients with predominant negative symptoms. This is in contrast to previous preliminary proof-of-concept trials, but highlights the need for more multicenter randomized controlled trials in the field of noninvasive brain stimulation.
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 | 0.001 | 0.028 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".