MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2585578012 · doi:10.3171/2016.9.jns16815

Efficacy of deep rTMS for neuropathic pain in the lower limb: a randomized, double-blind crossover trial of an H-coil and figure-8 coil

2017· article· en· W2585578012 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Takeshi Shimizu, Koichi Hosomi, Tomoyuki Maruo, Yuko Goto, Masaru Yokoe, Yu Kageyama, Toshio Shimokawa, Toshiki Yoshimine, Youichi Saitoh

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of neurosurgery · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinistry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and TechnologyJapan Agency for Medical Research and Development
KeywordsMedicineCrossover studyElectromagnetic coilRandomized controlled trialNeuropathic painDouble blindPhysical medicine and rehabilitationCrossoverPhysical therapyAnesthesiaSurgeryPlaceboArtificial intelligenceAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE Electrical motor cortex stimulation can relieve neuropathic pain (NP), but its use requires patients to undergo an invasive procedure. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) of the primary motor cortex (M1) using a figure-8 coil can relieve NP noninvasively, but its ability to relieve lower limb pain is still limited. Deep rTMS using an H-coil can effectively stimulate deep brain regions and has been widely used for the treatment of various neurological diseases; however, there have been no clinical studies comparing the effectiveness of figure-8 coils and H-coils. This study assessed the clinical effectiveness of 5 once-daily stimulations with H-coils and figure-8 coils in patients with NP. METHODS This randomized, double-blind, 3-way crossover trial examined 18 patients with NP who sequentially received 3 types of stimulations in the M1 for 5 consecutive days; each 5-day stimulation period was followed by a 17-day follow-up period before crossing over to the next type of stimulation. During each rTMS session, patients received a 5-Hz rTMS to the M1 region corresponding to the painful lower limb. The visual analog scale (VAS) and the Japanese version of the short-form McGill Pain Questionnaire 2 (SF-MPQ2-J) were used to measure pain intensity. The primary outcome was VAS score reduction immediately after and 1 hour after intervention. RESULTS Both the VAS and SF-MPQ2-J showed significant pain improvement immediately after deep rTMS with an H-coil as compared with the sham group (p < 0.001 and p = 0.049, respectively). However, neither outcome measure showed significant pain improvement when using a figure-8 coil. The VAS also showed significant pain improvement 1 hour after deep rTMS with an H-coil (p = 0.004) but not 1 hour after rTMS using a figure-8 coil. None of the patients exhibited any serious adverse events. CONCLUSIONS The current findings suggest that the use of deep rTMS with an H-coil in the lower limb region of the M1 in patients with NP was tolerable and could provide significant short-term pain relief. Clinical trial registration no.: UMIN000010536 ( http://www.umin.ac.jp/ctr/ ).

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.986

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.255 · 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.

Study designRandomized trial
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

Citations61
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of neurosurgerySame topicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation StudiesFrench-language works237,207