A Lack of Clinical Effect of High‐frequency <scp>r</scp>TMS to Dorsolateral Prefrontal Cortex on Bulimic Symptoms: A Randomised, Double‐blind Trial
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
Studies suggest that stimulation of the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) reduces food craving in bulimic patients, but evidence supporting repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) as a therapeutic tool is lacking. We investigated the safety and therapeutic efficacy of an adjunct high-frequency rTMS programme targeting the left DLPFC. Forty-seven women with bulimia nervosa were randomised to a real or sham stimulation group. The real group underwent 10 rTMS sessions, each consisting of 20 trains of 5 seconds with 55-second intervals between trains, at a frequency of 10 Hz. The main outcome was the number of binge episodes in the 15 days following the end of stimulation. Overall, no significant improvement in bingeing and purging symptoms was noted after the programme. rTMS was well tolerated. This suggests that 10 sessions of high-frequency rTMS to the left DLPFC provide no greater benefit than placebo. Future studies should consider methodological issues as well as alternative targets. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and Eating Disorders Association.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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