MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2795034837 · doi:10.1093/schbul/sby016.327

T51. TREATMENT OF NEGATIVE SYMPTOMS OF SCHIZOPHRENIA WITH TRANSCRANIAL CURRENT STIMULATION (TDCS): RESULTS OF RANDOMIZED, DOUBLE-BLINDED, SHAM-CONTROLLED TRIAL

2018· article· en· W2795034837 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Leandro Valiengo, Pedro Caldana Gordon, Maurício H. Serpa, Acioly L.T. Lacerda, Wagner F. Gattaz, Martinus van de Bilt, Helio Helkis, André R. Brunoni

Bibliographic record

VenueSchizophrenia Bulletin · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSchizophrenia research and treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTranscranial direct-current stimulationPositive and Negative Syndrome ScaleScale for the Assessment of Negative SymptomsRandomized controlled trialSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)PsychologyRating scaleDorsolateral prefrontal cortexDistressNeuropsychologyMedicinePsychiatryPrefrontal cortexPsychosisBrief Psychiatric Rating ScaleClinical psychologyInternal medicineStimulationDevelopmental psychologyCognition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The negative symptoms of schizophrenia cause significant distress and impairment. The treatment of them is a challenge, with medications having none or little effect. So, new treatments are necessary for this condition. The aim of the study was to ascertain the efficacy of tDCS in treating negative symptoms of schizophrenia This study was designed to be a randomized, sham-controlled, double-blinded trial using tDCS for the treatment of negative symptoms of schizophrenia. One-hundred (here we analyzed only 70% of the sample, the remaining will be presented at the meeting) patients will be enrolled and submitted to ten tDCS session over the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (anodal stimulation) and left temporo-parietal junction-left (cathodal stimulation), over 5 consecutive days, with 2 mA of current. Participants were assessed with clinical and neuropsychological tests before and after the intervention. The primary outcome was change (over time and across groups) in the scores of the Negative Subscale of Positive and Negative Symptoms Syndrome (PANSS). Our secondary outcomes consist of others scales as SANSS (Scale of Assessment of Negative Symptoms), Calgary and the AHRS (Auditory Hallucinations Rating Scale). From 70% of the sample the active tDCS was significantly superior to sham at endpoint at 6 weeks by negative sub scale of PANSS (mean difference, 3,5 points; SD=6.2; P<.05). The total PANSS and the hallucinations scale had no differences between both groups. The other times of analysis were not found differences between sham and active groups. The others scales (Calgary and SANSS have not being evaluated yet). The results of our studies suggests a potential role of tDCS for the treatment of negative symptoms of schizophrenia. The effect size was small. This is the biggest study with tDCS for treating negative symptoms of schizophrenia until now. At the meeting all the data will be analyzed (100 patients), it these could change our preliminary results.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0040.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.284 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSchizophrenia BulletinSame topicSchizophrenia research and treatmentFrench-language works237,207