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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.055 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".