Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation May Improve Cognitive-Motor Function in Functionally Limited Older Adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the effects of a transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) intervention with the anode placed over the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (dlPFC) and cathode over the right supraorbital region, on cognition, mobility, and "dual-task" standing and walking in older adults with mild-to-moderate motor and cognitive impairments. METHODS: A double-blinded, block-randomized, sham-controlled trial was conducted in 18 nondemented, ambulatory adults aged ⩾65 years with slow walking speed (⩽1.0 m/s) and "executive" dysfunction (Trail Making Test B score ⩽25th percentile of age- and education-matched norms). Interventions included ten 20-minute sessions of tDCS or sham stimulation. Cognition, mobility, and dual-task standing and walking were assessed at baseline, postintervention, and 2 weeks thereafter. Dual tasking was also assessed immediately before and after the first tDCS session. RESULTS: Intervention compliance was high (mean ± SD = 9.5 ± 1.1 sessions) and no unexpected or serious side effects were reported. tDCS, compared with sham, induced improvements in the Montreal Cognitive Assessment total score ( P = .03) and specifically within the executive function subscore of this test ( P = .002), and in several metrics of dual-task standing and walking ( P < .05). Each of these effects persisted for 2 weeks. tDCS had no effect on the Timed Up-and-Go test of mobility or the Geriatric Depression Scale. Those participants who exhibited larger improvements in dual-task standing posture following the first tDCS session exhibited larger cognitive-motor improvements following 2 weeks of tDCS ( P < .04). INTERPRETATION: tDCS intervention designed to stimulate the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex may improve executive function and dual tasking in older adults with functional limitations.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".