Possible Facilitative Effects of Repeated Anodal Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on Functional Outcome 1 Month Later in Schizophrenia: An Open Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent research on neuromodulation techniques, such as transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), for the treatment of schizophrenia has mainly focused on psychotic symptoms. We aimed to determine whether repetitive tDCS is efficacious in improving determinants of outcome, such as cognitive function, daily-living skills, and depressive mood in patients with schizophrenia. Twenty-eight patients underwent tDCS (2 mA x 20 min) two times per day for five consecutive days. The anodal electrode was placed over the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex while the cathodal electrode was placed over the right supraorbital region. One month after the last stimulation, there was a significant improvement on cognitive function, measured by the Brief Assessment of Cognition in Schizophrenia (d = 0.49). Significant effects were also shown on daily-living skills (functional capacity), measured by the UCSD Performance-based Skills Assessment-Brief (d = 0.70). Depressive symptoms, measured by the Calgary Depression Rating Scale, as well as psychotic symptoms measured by on the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale Positive and General Psychopathology subscales also responded to the treatment (d = 0.38, d = 0.48 and d= 0.50, respectively). This is the first study to suggest that tDCS with the anodal electrodes on the left prefrontal cortex improves functional capacity and depressive symptoms in patients with schizophrenia. These results may add to the concept that tDCS provides a strategy to enhance functional outcomes in patients with schizophrenia.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".