Therapeutic Role of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation in Alzheimer Disease Patients: Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To explore the neuropsychological effects and levels of tau protein (TAU), amyloid β 1-42 (Aβ 1-42), and lipid peroxidase after 10 sessions of anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) in patients with mild to moderate Alzheimer disease (AD). PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 46 consecutive patients with probable AD participated in this study. They were classified randomly into 2 equal groups: active versus sham. Each patient received 10 sessions of anodal tDCS over the left and right temporoparietal region for 20 minutes for each side with the cathode on the left arm. Patients were assessed using the Modified Mini Mental State Examination (MMMSE), clock drawing test, Montreal Cognitive Scale (MoCA), and the Cornell Scale for depression. Serum TAU, Aβ 1-42, and lipid peroxidase were measured before and after the 10th session. RESULTS: There was a significant improvement in the total score of each cognitive rating scale (MMMSE, clock drawing test, and MoCA) in the real group, whereas no such change was observed in the sham group. The Cornell depression score improved significantly in both groups. There was a significant increase in serum Aβ 1-42 ( P = .02) in the real but not in the sham group, with a significant Treatment condition × Time interaction ( P = .009). There was no significant effect on tau or lipid peroxidase in either group but a significant positive correlation between changes of Aβ1-42 and MMMSE ( P = .005) and MoCA ( P = .02). CONCLUSION: The observed cognitive improvements were complemented by parallel changes in serum levels of Aβ 1-42.
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) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".