MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2332064974 · doi:10.1017/s1461145714000200

Effects of brief pulse and ultrabrief pulse electroconvulsive stimulation on rodent brain and behaviour in the corticosterone model of depression

2014· article· en· W2332064974 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe International Journal of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicElectroconvulsive Therapy Studies
Canadian institutionsTrinity College
FundersHealth Research Board
KeywordsCorticosteroneBehavioural despair testElectroconvulsive therapyStimulationInternal medicineEndocrinologyHippocampusAntidepressantGlial fibrillary acidic proteinNeurotrophic factorsPsychologyGlucocorticoidChemistryElectroconvulsive ShockNeuroscienceHormoneMedicineReceptorImmunohistochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Brief pulse electroconvulsive therapy (BP ECT; pulse width 0.5-1.5 ms) is the most effective treatment available for severe depression. However, its use is associated with side-effects. The stimulus in ultrabrief pulse ECT (UBP ECT; pulse width 0.25-0.3 ms) is more physiological and has been reported to be associated with less cognitive side-effects, but its antidepressant effectiveness is not yet well established. Using electroconvulsive stimulation (ECS), the animal model of ECT, we previously reported UBP ECS to be significantly less effective than well-established BP ECS in eliciting behavioural, molecular and cellular antidepressant-related effects in naïve rats. We have now compared the effects of BP and UBP ECS in an animal model of depression related to exogenous supplementation with the stress-induced glucocorticoid hormone, corticosterone. Corticosterone administration resulted in an increase in immobility time in the forced swim test (FST) (p < 0.01) and decreases in the expression of brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) (p < 0.05) and glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) (p < 0.001) in the hippocampus and frontal cortex. There was no significant difference in the duration or type of seizure induced by BP (0.5 ms) or UBP (0.3 ms) ECS. UBP ECS proved to be as effective as BP ECS at inducing a behavioural antidepressant response in the FST with a significant decrease (p < 0.001) in immobility seen following administration of ECS. Both forms of ECS also induced significant increases in BDNF protein (p < 0.01) expression in the hippocampus. BP ECS (p < 0.05) but not UBP ECS induced a significant increase in GFAP levels in the hippocampus and frontal cortex. Overall, UBP ECS effectively induced antidepressant-related behavioural and molecular responses in the corticosterone supplementation model, providing the first preclinical data on the potential role of this form of ECS to treat a depression phenotype related to elevated corticosterone.

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 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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.777
Threshold uncertainty score0.325

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.302 · 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