MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3107759335 · doi:10.1155/2020/8859394

Baseline Motor Impairment Predicts Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Combined with Physical Therapy-Induced Improvement in Individuals with Chronic Stroke

2020· article· en· W3107759335 on OpenAlexaff
Adriana Baltar, Daniele Piscitelli, Déborah Marques, Lívia Shirahige, Kátia Monte‐Silva

Bibliographic record

VenueNeural Plasticity · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico
KeywordsTranscranial direct-current stimulationChronic strokeMedicineStroke (engine)Physical medicine and rehabilitationMotor impairmentBaseline (sea)StimulationNeurosciencePhysical therapyInternal medicinePsychologyRehabilitation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) can enhance the effect of conventional therapies in post-stroke neurorehabilitation. The ability to predict an individual’s potential for tDCS-induced recovery may permit rehabilitation providers to make rational decisions about who will be a good candidate for tDCS therapy. We investigated the clinical and biological characteristics which might predict tDCS plus physical therapy effects on upper limb motor recovery in chronic stroke patients. A cohort of 80 chronic stroke individuals underwent ten to fifteen sessions of tDCS plus physical therapy. The sensorimotor function of the upper limb was assessed by means of the upper extremity section of the Fugl-Meyer scale (UE-FM), before and after treatment. A backward stepwise regression was used to assess the effect of age, sex, time since stroke, brain lesion side, and basal level of motor function on UE-FM improvement after treatment. Following the intervention, UE-FM significantly improved ( <a:math xmlns:a="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M1"> <a:mi>p</a:mi> <a:mo>&lt;</a:mo> <a:mn>0.05</a:mn> </a:math> ), and the magnitude of the change was clinically important (mean 6.2 points, 95% CI: 5.2–7.4). The baseline level of UE-FM was the only significant predictor ( <c:math xmlns:c="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M2"> <c:msup> <c:mrow> <c:mi>R</c:mi> </c:mrow> <c:mrow> <c:mn>2</c:mn> </c:mrow> </c:msup> <c:mo>=</c:mo> <c:mn>0.90</c:mn> </c:math> , <e:math xmlns:e="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M3"> <e:msub> <e:mrow> <e:mi>F</e:mi> </e:mrow> <e:mrow> <e:mfenced open="(" close=")"> <e:mrow> <e:mn>1</e:mn> <e:mo>,</e:mo> <e:mn>76</e:mn> </e:mrow> </e:mfenced> </e:mrow> </e:msub> <e:mo>=</e:mo> <e:mn>682.80</e:mn> </e:math> , <i:math xmlns:i="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M4"> <i:mi>p</i:mi> <i:mo>&lt;</i:mo> <i:mn>0.001</i:mn> </i:math> ) of tDCS response. These findings may help to guide clinical decisions according to the profile of each patient. Future studies should investigate whether stroke severity affects the effectiveness of tDCS combined with physical therapy.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.830
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations12
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeural PlasticitySame topicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation StudiesFrench-language works237,207