MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2934350162 · doi:10.1177/1545968319840285

Therapeutic Role of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation in Alzheimer Disease Patients: Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trial

2019· article· en· W2934350162 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Eman M. Khedr, Ragaa H. M. Salama, Mohamed Abdel Hameed, Noha Abo Elfetoh, Peater Seif

Bibliographic record

VenueNeurorehabilitation and neural repair · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAssiut University
KeywordsTranscranial direct-current stimulationMontreal Cognitive AssessmentPsychologyBeck Depression InventoryInternal medicinePlaceboNeuropsychologyRating scaleDepression (economics)StimulationMedicinePhysical therapyCognitionPsychiatryDevelopmental psychologyCognitive impairmentPathologyAnxiety

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.350
Threshold uncertainty score0.887

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.288 · 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.

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

Citations93
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeurorehabilitation and neural repairSame topicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation StudiesFrench-language works237,207