Evaluation of the effectiveness of transcranial electrostimulation in treatment of neuropsychiatric disorders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: Evaluation of the effectiveness the method of transcranial electrostimulation in treatment of neuropsychiatric disorders with the use of a patches by the company “Aganyan”. Materials and methods: The study was a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study, participated 106 patients with neuropsychiatric disorders. All participants in were divided into tables according to gender, age and diagnosis. Each subject was given the “Aganyan” patches and a special brochure, in which the method of application was indicated in detail. The wearable patch includes a flexible substrate, a binder an adhesive layer, with an electrode foil attached to it. Patients applied one patch behind each ear. The patches were applied for eight hours every third day for three months. To assess the effectiveness of therapy in patients the following tests were used: The Montreal Cognitive Assessment Scale; MMSE Scale: Concise Mental Status Scale; diaries of observation of the patient’s condition to identify side effects; special brochures in which the subjects independently indicated the effects of the “Aganyan” patches. Tests were performed before and after the use of the “Aganyan” patches. Results: When using the patches of the “Aganyan” company, none of the participants in the study had any side effects; According to the results of the Montreal test according to the criterion of memory and the MMSE test, the effectiveness of the patch was noted in patients with all clinical diagnoses. The greatest positive dynamics was revealed according to the results of the Montreal test according to the criterion of memory in patients with migraine (30%), insomnia (31%), vascular dementia (32%), and according to the results of the MMSE test in patients with diagnoses: cerebrovascular disease: consequences of a cerebral infarction brain (31%), vascular dementia (56%). Conclusion: The patches of “Aganyan” company have proven its effectiveness through electrical stimulation with low-intensity current in patients in different age groups with different clinical diagnoses.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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 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".