MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3022903298 · doi:10.1177/0706743720923064

A Randomized Sham-controlled Trial of 1-Hz and 10-Hz Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (rTMS) of the Right Dorsolateral Prefrontal Cortex in Civilian Post-traumatic Stress Disorder: Un essai randomisé contrôlé simulé de stimulation magnétique transcrânienne repetitive (SMTr) de 1 Hz et 10 Hz du cortex préfrontal dorsolatéral droit dans le trouble de stress post-traumatique chez des civils

2020· article· en· W3022903298 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Kawai Leong, Peter Chan, Larry Ong, Amy Zwicker, Sharon Willan, Raymond W. Lam, Alexander McGirr

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Psychiatry · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryVancouver General HospitalHotchkiss Brain InstituteUniversity of British Columbia
FundersVancouver Coastal Health Research Institute
KeywordsTranscranial magnetic stimulationRandomized controlled trialDorsolateral prefrontal cortexAnxietyPrefrontal cortexMedicinePsychiatryPsychologyStimulationTraumatic stressClinical psychologyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationNeuroscienceInternal medicineCognition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Despite effective psychological and pharmacological treatments, there is a large unmet burden of illness in post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is a noninvasive intervention and a putative treatment strategy for PTSD. The evidence base to date suggests that rTMS targeting the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC), in particular the right DLPFC, leads to improvements in PTSD symptoms. However, optimal stimulation parameters have yet to be determined. In this study, we examine the efficacy of high- and low-frequency rTMS of the right DLPFC using a randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled design in civilian PTSD. METHODS: We conducted a 2-week single-site randomized sham-controlled trial of rTMS targeting the right DLPFC. We recruited civilians aged 19 to 70 with PTSD and randomized subjects with allocation concealment to daily 1-Hz rTMS, 10-Hz rTMS, or sham rTMS. The primary outcome was improvement in Clinician Administered PTSD Scale-IV (CAPS-IV). Secondary outcomes included change in depressive and anxiety symptoms. RESULTS: = -1.07) but not in the 10-Hz group. This was not attributable to changes in anxious or depressive symptomatology. Ten-Hz stimulation appeared to improve depressive symptoms compared to sham. CONCLUSION: Low-frequency rTMS is efficacious in the treatment of civilian PTSD. Our data suggest that high-frequency rTMS of the right DLPFC is worthy of additional investigation for the treatment of depressive symptoms comorbid with PTSD.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.416
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.216 · 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.

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

Citations37
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of PsychiatrySame topicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation StudiesFrench-language works237,207