MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3204711996 · doi:10.1016/j.jadr.2021.100250

Investigating EEG biomarkers of clinical response to low frequency rTMS in depression

2021· article· en· W3204711996 on OpenAlexaff
Helena Voetterl, Jean‐Philippe Miron, Farrokh Mansouri, Linsay Fox, Molly Hyde, Daniel M. Blumberger, Zafiris J. Daskalakis, Fidel Vila‐Rodriguez, Alexander T. Sack, Jonathan Downar

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Affective Disorders Reports · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
Canadian institutionsCentre for Addiction and Mental HealthUniversity of TorontoUniversity of British ColumbiaCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de MontréalUniversity Health Network
FundersBrain and Behavior Research Foundation
KeywordsTranscranial magnetic stimulationElectroencephalographyBeck Depression InventoryDepression (economics)PsychologyMajor depressive disorderAudiologyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationMedicinePhysical therapyNeuroscienceStimulationPsychiatryAnxietyCognition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is an effective intervention for major depressive disorder (MDD). Completing a full treatment course, however, is costly and time-consuming. Biomarkers of clinical outcome such as baseline resting-state brain activity measured with electroencephalography (EEG) may spare people futile treatment and conserve limited clinical resources. Additionally, investigating changes in EEG power post-treatment could provide insights into the working mechanism of rTMS. 39 MDD patients received 6 daily sessions of accelerated low-frequency (LF) rTMS over the right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) for 5 days followed by a tapering course of 25 once-daily sessions. Resting-state EEG and heart rate (HR) measures were acquired immediately before and after a single rTMS session at 3 different timepoints: baseline, one week after the final accelerated session, and upon completion of the tapering course. The primary clinical outcome measure was the Beck Depression Inventory II (BDI-II). High relative baseline theta power in prefrontal areas and high baseline HR were associated with poorer clinical outcome. HR decreased acutely at the beginning of the patients’ first rTMS session but this effect was not associated with treatment outcome. The main limitations were small sample size and a lack of sham and healthy control group. Our results suggest that high relative theta power at baseline may be a marker of poorer response to right-sided LF rTMS. If validated, this easily applicable measure could inform rTMS protocol choice for the individual, thereby potentially speeding up patient recovery and saving clinical resources.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.326 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations13
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Affective Disorders ReportsSame topicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation StudiesFrench-language works237,207