Theta-Burst Stimulation for Cognitive Enhancement in Parkinson's Disease With Mild Cognitive Impairment: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Sham-Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Mild cognitive impairment is a common non-motor symptom of Parkinson's disease (PD-MCI) and has minimal treatment options. Objective: In this double-blind, randomized, sham-controlled trial, we assessed the effect of repeated sessions of intermittent theta-burst stimulation over the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex on cognition and brain connectivity in subjects with PD-MCI. Methods: Forty-one subjects were randomized to receive real ( n = 21) or sham stimulation ( n = 20). All subjects underwent neuropsychological assessments before, 1 day, and 1 month after stimulation. Subjects also underwent resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging before and 48 h after stimulation. The primary outcome was the change in the cognitive domain (executive function, attention, memory, language, and visuospatial abilities) z-scores across time. Results: There was an insignificant effect on cognitive domain z-scores across time when comparing real with sham stimulation and correcting for multiple comparisons across cognitive domains ( p > 0.05 Bonferroni correction). However, the real stimulation group demonstrated a trend toward improved executive functioning scores at the 1-month follow-up compared with sham ( p < 0.05 uncorrected). After real stimulation, the connectivity of the stimulation site showed decreased connectivity to the left caudate head. There was no change in connectivity within or between the stimulation network (a network of cortical regions connected to the stimulation site) and the striatal network. However, higher baseline connectivity between the stimulation network and the striatal network was associated with improved executive function scores at 1 month. Conclusions: These results suggest that intermittent theta-burst stimulation over the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex in subjects with PD-MCI has minimal effect on cognition compared with sham, although there were trends toward improved executive function. This intervention may be more effective in subjects with higher baseline connectivity between the stimulation network and the striatal network. This trial supports further investigation focusing on executive function and incorporating connectivity-based targeting. Clinical Trial Registration: www.ClinicalTrials.gov , identifier NCT03243214.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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".