Effects of bilateral transcranial direct current stimulation on working memory and global cognition in older patients with remitted major depression: A pilot randomized clinical trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of a 10-day course of bilateral anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) of the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) on working memory and global cognition in elderly participants with remitted major depressive disorder at 14 days (primary outcome) and 90 days (secondary outcome) post intervention. DESIGN: Randomized double blind controlled trial (clinicaltrials.gov # NCT02212366). SETTING: Community dwelling outpatient setting. PARTICIPANTS: Sixty or older with previous single or recurrent episodes of major depression currently in full remission. INTERVENTION: A 10 day course of active or sham bilateral DLPFC anodal tDCS. MEASUREMENTS: (a) Working memory assessed by a computerized N back task, and (b) global cognition assessed by a standard paper and pencil neuropsychological test battery. RESULTS: Thirty-three participants, (mean (SD) age = 66. 5 (5.7) year) were enrolled, out of which 18 (mean (SD) age = 66. 3 (5.8) year) were randomized to active tDCS and 15 (mean (SD) age = 66. 7 (5.8) years) to sham tDCS. All randomized participants except one from the sham group -completed the tDCS course. There were no differences between the groups on working memory performance or global cognition at 14 or 90 days post intervention. Both groups showed promising changes in working memory and global cognition over time. CONCLUSIONS: tDCS was well tolerated in older patients with remitted MDD, however, as compared to the sham group, it did not improve working memory or global cognition. Future studies should investigate tDCS with alternative parameters to enhance cognition in this population.
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) | 0.002 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".