The Effect of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on Chronic Neuropathic Pain in Patients with Multiple Sclerosis: Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Chronic neuropathic pain is a common symptom in multiple sclerosis (MS). This randomized controlled single-blinded study investigated whether a new protocol involving five days of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) with an interval period would be effective to reduce pain using the visual analog scale (VAS). Other secondary outcomes included the Neuropathic Pain Scale (NPS), Depression Anxiety Stress Score (DASS), Short Form McGill Pain Questionnaire (SFMPQ), and Multiple Sclerosis Quality of Life 54 (MSQOL54). DESIGN: A total of 30 participants were recruited for the study, with 15 participants randomized to a sham group or and 15 randomized to an active group. After a five-day course of a-tDCS, VAS and NPS scores were measured daily and then weekly after treatment up to four weeks after treatment. Secondary outcomes were measured pretreatment and then weekly up to four weeks. RESULTS: After a five-day course of a-tDCS, VAS scores were significantly reduced compared with sham tDCS and remained significantly low up to week 2 post-treatment. There were no statistically significant mean changes in MSQOL54, SFMPQ, NPS, or DASS for the sham or treatment group before treatment or at four-week follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that repeated stimulation with a-tDCS for five days can reduce pain intensity for a prolonged period in patients with MS who have chronic neuropathic pain.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.008 | 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".