MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3217150689 · doi:10.1016/j.brs.2021.10.118

Adverse childhood experiences and repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation outcomes for depression

2021· article· en· W3217150689 on OpenAlexaffabout
Enoch Ng, Emily H.Y. Wong, Peter Giacobbe

Bibliographic record

VenueBrain stimulation · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTranscranial magnetic stimulationDepression (economics)MedicineHamdRating scaleInternal medicineAdverse effectMajor depressive disorderPsychiatryPsychologyMoodStimulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: History of adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) is associated with poorer treatment outcomes in depression; this has been found for psychotherapy, pharmacotherapy, and their combination. However, how ACEs affect neuromodulation outcomes, such as repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), remains unexplored. Objective: Characterize the prevalence of ACEs in patients receiving rTMS for depression at a tertiary care centre in Canada. Investigate whether ACEs affect depression outcomes in these patients. Methods: The Hamilton Depression Rating Scale, HAMD-17) was collected at baseline and every 2 weeks until the end of treatment at 4-6 weeks. The primary outcome was remission (HAMD-17 of 7 or less). The ACE-10 questionnaire was used to quantify categories of ACEs. Data from the first round of treatment from 94 patients with ACE-10, baseline and end-of-acute treatment HAMD-17 scores were included in analyses. Results: Patients had a median of 2 and mean of 2.9 ACEs (range 0-10, standard deviation 2.7). 78% had at least 1, 63% at least 2, 48% at least 3, and 35% at least 4 ACEs. Remission rates at end-of-acute treatment were not significantly different between low and high ACE groups (2 or fewer vs 3 or more ACEs; 9/49, 18% and 12/45, 27% respectively; chi2 = 0.93, p = 0.34). Logistic regression using ACE-10 or its sub-scales revealed no significant deleterious effects of total score, abuse, neglect, or household dysfunction on remission. Linear mixed models of longitudinal data revealed similar decreases in HAMD-17 from baseline over time that did not significantly differ based on ACE score. Conclusions: Patients with depression receiving rTMS at a tertiary care centre in Toronto, Canada reported on average 3 ACEs. ACE scores were not predictive of poorer antidepressant outcomes from acute treatment with rTMS for depression. Presence of high levels of ACEs should not preclude consideration of rTMS for depression. Keywords: adverse childhood experience, childhood maltreatment, transcranial magnetic stimulation, major depressive disorder

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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.853
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBrain stimulationSame topicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation StudiesFrench-language works237,207