Effect of high frequency versus theta‐burst repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation on suicidality in patients with treatment‐resistant depression
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effect of 10 Hz repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) and intermittent theta-burst stimulation (iTBS) on suicidality in patients with treatment-resistant depression (TRD). METHODS: We used data from a three-site randomized clinical trial comparing 10 Hz rTMS and iTBS applied to the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) in patients with TRD. We compared the effect of 10Hz rTMS and iTBS on suicidality as measured by the suicide item of the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale 17-item (HDRS-17). RESULTS: = 0.674, df = 1, p = 0.4117). There was a significant correlation between change in suicidality and change in depression severity for both modalities (10 Hz, Pearson's r = 0.564; iTBS, Pearson's r = 0.502), with a significantly larger decrease in depression severity for those in whom suicidality remitted compared to those in whom it did not (t = 10.912, df = 276.8, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Both 10 Hz and iTBS rTMS were effective in reducing suicidality in TRD. Future trials of iTBS for depression should include discrete measures of suicidality.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".