Concurrent transcranial direct current stimulation and resting state functional magnetic resonance imaging in patients with Gambling Disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background/Introduction:Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) delivered over the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) while patients are at rest can decrease craving in patients with substance-related and addictive disorders. Yet, the effects of tDCS on resting-state brain activity remain unknown in this population. This study examined the effects of tDCS on resting-state functional connectivity (rsFC) with concurrent stimulation and functional magnetic resonance imaging in patients with gambling disorder. Methods:This was a randomized, sham-controlled, double-blind, crossover study. The anodal and cathodal electrodes were applied over the right and left DLPFC, respectively. Patients received 30 min of active and sham stimulation on separate days. rsFC was assessed before and during stimulation with seed-based analyses. Results:There was a significant increase of rsFC between the right DLPFC seed and the right superior parietal lobule during active stimulation as compared to during sham stimulation (p = 0.0059, corrected for multiple comparisons). There was also a positive correlation between rsFC change of this frontoparietal network and brain volume of the right DLPFC (p = 0.0042, corrected for multiple comparisons). Discussion:A single session of tDCS targeting the DLPFC strengthened functional connectivity in a frontoparietal circuit, known to be implicated in cognitive control, especially in patients with a greater volume of the region under the anode electrode. Impact statementTranscranial direct current stimulation increased the functional connectivity of a frontoparietal circuit in patients with gambling disorder. These changes were larger in patients with greater volume of the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. Transcranial direct current stimulation strengthened the connectivity of a brain network known to be associated with cognitive control.
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 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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".