MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4237682847 · doi:10.1176/jnp.2010.22.1.75

Subgenual Cingulate Theta Activity Predicts Treatment Response of Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation in Participants With Vascular Depression

2010· article· en· W4237682847 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuropsychiatry · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of Mental HealthIowa City Veterans Affairs Medical CenterEli Lilly and CompanyU.S. Department of Veterans Affairs
KeywordsTranscranial magnetic stimulationDepression (economics)StimulationPsychologyBrain stimulationAnterior cingulate cortexPsychiatryNeuroscienceMedicineInternal medicineCognition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is an effective treatment for depression.Increased metabolism in the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) is a known predictor for antidepressant response.The authors assessed whether increased theta power within the ACC predicts rTMS response in participants with vascular depression.Sixty-five participants were randomized to active or sham rTMS.Outcome was assessed using the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale.Electroencephalography was obtained, and comparisons were made among each group with a normative database using low-resolution electromagnetic tomography.Results suggest that vascular depression participants respond well to rTMS and that increased low-theta power in the subgenual ACC predicts response to rTMS.A modern apparatus of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) was developed in Great Britain in 1985. 1 Since then, rTMS has been utilized to provide noninvasive brain stimulation for research and treatment purposes.The most frequent application of rTMS in psychiatry has been as a treatment for major depression, and the first controlled treatment study was published in 1996. 2 Although a large number of studies have suggested that rTMS is efficacious against depression, a recent review found that the efficacy can be quite variable. 3This may be due to the fact that the etiological factors underlying major depression are heterogeneous, causing some forms of depression to respond better to rTMS than others.Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation has already been approved as a standard treatment procedure for depression in some countries such as Canada and Israel; however, it has only recently been approved by the Food and Drug Administration in the United States.The term "vascular depression" has been used to describe depression in elderly patients with cerebrovascular disease.A causal relationship between cerebrovascular disease and late-life depression is supported by evidence such as coexistence of depression with hypertension, coronary artery disease, and multiple hyperintensities on brain imaging. 4Patients with latelife depression often have a chronic, treatment resistant course and frequently meet criteria for vascular depression.

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.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.886
Threshold uncertainty score0.692

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.259 · 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