Depressive symptom trajectories associated with standard and accelerated rTMS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To determine if an accelerated rTMS protocol results in distinct depressive symptom response trajectories, compared to a standard rTMS protocol. We also sought to validate previous analyses that identified distinct depressive symptom response trajectories with rTMS treatment using an external dataset. METHOD: Data from two recent clinical trials comparing accelerated rTMS protocol delivered to the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) with standard once-daily rTMS protocol were used to identify depressive symptom response trajectories. The accelerated protocol in Trial 1 was conventional 10-Hz rTMS, while Trial 2 employed intermittent theta burst stimulation (iTBS). Participants were adult outpatients (18-70 years old) with bipolar or unipolar depression and moderate-severe depression (Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale score >19) who had failed to respond to adequate courses of two different antidepressants. We used group-based trajectory modeling to identify MADRS response trajectories, and regression techniques adjusting for baseline depressive symptom severity to determine the association between treatment protocol and depressive symptom response trajectory. RESULTS: Treatment outcomes of 189 participants were analysed. We identified four distinct response trajectories: "nonresponse" (N = 59; 30.7%), "minimal response" (N = 65; 34.1%), "higher symptoms, response" (N = 26; 14.6%), "lower symptoms, response" (N = 39; 20.6%). We failed to find an association between rTMS protocol (accelerated vs standard) with depressive symptom response trajectory even after adjusting for baseline depressive symptom severity. CONCLUSION: The accelerated rTMS protocol in this study did not impact depressive symptom response trajectories. This work provides further confirmatory evidence that there are distinct depressive symptom response trajectories with rTMS delivered to the left DLPFC. AUSTRALIAN NEW ZEALAND CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRY: ACTRN12616000443493 and ACTRN12613000044729.
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 | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".