MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2559963222 · doi:10.1038/srep37461

The Relationship Between Cortical Inhibition and Electroconvulsive Therapy in the Treatment of Major Depressive Disorder

2016· article· en· W2559963222 on OpenAlexafffund
Daphne Voineskos, Andrea Levinson, Yinming Sun, Mera S. Barr, Faranak Farzan, Tarek K. Rajji, Paul B. Fitzgerald, Daniel M. Blumberger, Zafiris J. Daskalakis

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicElectroconvulsive Therapy Studies
Canadian institutionsCentre for Global Health ResearchUniversity of TorontoCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsElectroconvulsive therapyTreatment-resistant depressionMajor depressive disorderDepression (economics)MedicinePsychologyTherapeutic effectInternal medicineAnesthesiaElectroconvulsive Shock

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dysfunctional cortical inhibition (CI) is postulated as a key neurophysiological mechanism in major depressive disorder. Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is the treatment of choice for resistant depression and ECT has been associated with enhanced CI. The objective of this study was to evaluate the relationship between CI and ECT response in resistant depression. Twenty-five patients with treatment resistant depression underwent an acute course of ECT. CI was indexed by the cortical silent period (CSP) and short-interval cortical inhibition (SICI), through TMS-EMG. CI and clinical response was measured prior to beginning an acute ECT course and within 48 hours of the last ECT treatment in the course. Clinical response to ECT was assessed by HDRS-17 before and after an acute course of ECT. We found that there was a significant difference in CSP at baseline between responder and non-responder groups (p = 0.044). Baseline CSP predicted therapeutic response to ECT with sensitivity of 80% and specificity of 60%. There were no changes in CSP or SICI after administration of the ECT course. Our findings suggest that duration of pre-treatment CSP may be a useful predictor of therapeutic response to ECT in patients with TRD.

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 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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.336

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 studies0.0000.001
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.277 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations28
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicElectroconvulsive Therapy StudiesFrench-language works237,207