MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4220924237 · doi:10.2196/37836

Feasibility of a Combined Neuromodulation and Yoga Intervention for Mild Traumatic Brain Injury and Chronic Pain: Protocol for an Open-label Pilot Trial

2022· article· en· W4220924237 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kelly Krese, Kyla Z. Donnelly, Bella Etingen, Theresa Pape, Sarmistha Chaudhuri, Alexandra Aaronson, Rachana P Shah, Dulal K. Bhaumik, Andrea Billups, Sabrina Bedo, Mary Terese Wanicek-Squeo, Sonia Bobra, Amy A. Herrold

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. Department of Veterans Affairs
KeywordsNeuromodulationMedicineIntervention (counseling)Traumatic brain injuryChronic painProtocol (science)Physical therapyRandomized controlled trialPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPilot trialOpen labelPsychologyAlternative medicinePsychiatrySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) and chronic pain often co-occur and worsen rehabilitation outcomes. There is a need for improved multimodal nonpharmacologic treatments that could improve outcomes for both conditions. Yoga is a promising activity-based intervention for mTBI and chronic pain, and neuromodulation through transcranial magnetic stimulation is a promising noninvasive, nonpharmacological treatment for mTBI and chronic pain. Intermittent theta burst stimulation (iTBS) is a type of patterned, excitatory transcranial magnetic stimulation. iTBS can induce a window of neuroplasticity, making it ideally suited to boost the effects of treatments provided after it. Thus, iTBS may magnify the impacts of subsequently delivered interventions as compared to delivering those interventions alone and accordingly boost their impact on outcomes. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to (1) develop a combined iTBS+yoga intervention for mTBI and chronic pain, (2) assess the intervention's feasibility and acceptability, and (3) gather preliminary clinical outcome data on quality of life, function, and pain that will guide future studies. METHODS: This is a mixed methods, pilot, open-labeled, within-subject intervention study. We will enroll 20 US military veteran participants. The combined iTBS+yoga intervention will be provided in small group settings once a week for 6 weeks. The yoga intervention will follow the LoveYourBrain yoga protocol-specifically developed for individuals with TBI. iTBS will be administered immediately prior to the LoveYourBrain yoga session. We will collect preliminary quantitative outcome data before and after the intervention related to quality of life (TBI-quality of life), function (Mayo-Portland Adaptability Index), and pain (Brief Pain Inventory) to inform larger studies. We will collect qualitative data via semistructured interviews focused on intervention acceptability after completion of the intervention. RESULTS: This study protocol was approved by Edward Hines Jr Veterans Administration Hospital Institutional Review Board (Hines IRB 1573116-4) and was prospectively registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04517604). This study includes a Food and Drug Administration Investigational Device Exemption (IDE: G200195). A 2-year research plan timeline was developed. As of March 2022, a total of 6 veterans have enrolled in the study. Data collection is ongoing and will be completed by November 2022. We expect the results of this study to be available by October 2024. CONCLUSIONS: We will be able to provide preliminary evidence of safety, feasibility, and acceptability of a novel combined iTBS and yoga intervention for mTBI and chronic pain-conditions with unmet treatment needs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04517604; https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04517604. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/37836.

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)0.019
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.046
Threshold uncertainty score0.155

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0190.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0050.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.003
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0050.002
Research integrity0.0060.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0460.011

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 head0.715
GPT teacher head0.636
Teacher spread0.079 · 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 designNon-randomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations5
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research Protocols→Same topicTraumatic Brain Injury Research→French-language works237,207→