MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4281918454 · doi:10.1002/ana.26430

Non‐invasive Brain Stimulation Can Reduce Unilateral Spatial Neglect after Stroke: <scp>ELETRON</scp> Trial

2022· article· en· W4281918454 on OpenAlexaff
Taís Regina da Silva, Hélio Rubens de Carvalho Nunes, Rafael Dalle Molle da Costa, Juli Thomaz de Souza, Fernanda Cristina Winckler, Lorena Cristina Alvarez Sartor, Gabriel Pinheiro Módolo, Natália Cristina Ferreira, Josiela Cristina da Silva Rodrigues, Rafael Guimarães Kanda, Marcelo Ortolani Fogarolli, Guilherme Ferreira Borges, Gabriela Rizzo Soares Rizzatti, Priscila Watson Ribeiro, Diandra B. Favoretto, Luan Rafael Aguiar dos Santos, Silméia Garcia Zanati Bazan, Luiz Eduardo Betting, Letícia Cláudia de Oliveira Antunes, Vítor Mendes Pereira, Dylan J. Edwards, Octávio Marques Pontes‐Neto, Adriana Bastos Conforto, Rodrigo Bazán, Gustavo José Luvizutto

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Neurology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicSpatial Neglect and Hemispheric Dysfunction
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's Hospital
FundersConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo
KeywordsTranscranial direct-current stimulationPhysical therapyFunctional Independence MeasureStroke (engine)MedicineModified Rankin ScalePost-hoc analysisPhysical medicine and rehabilitationRandomized controlled trialRepeated measures designAnalysis of varianceBrain stimulationRehabilitationPsychologyInternal medicineStimulationIschemic strokeIschemia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Rehabilitation top-down techniques based on brain stimulation present variable outcomes in unilateral spatial neglect (USN) after stroke. This study aimed to examine the effects of physical therapy after anodal and cathodal transcranial direct current stimulation (A-tDCS and C-tDCS, respectively) to improve visuospatial and functional impairments in individuals with USN after stroke. METHODS: This double-blinded, pilot randomized clinical trial enrolled patients with USN after ischemic stroke. Randomization was stratified according to the Behavior Inattention Test-Conventional (BIT-C) and Catherine Bergego Scale (CBS). Outpatient physical therapy was conducted for 7.5 weeks after 20 minutes of tDCS. The primary outcome was the USN degree evaluated by the BIT-C. Secondary outcomes were the difference in CBS score, stroke severity (National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale [NIHSS]), disability (modified Rankin Scale), autonomy (Barthel Index, Functional Independence Measure), and quality of life (EuroQol Group 5-Dimension Self-Report Questionnaire). Outcomes were analyzed using an analysis of covariance model corrected by age, baseline NIHSS, and baseline BIT-C. Pairwise post hoc comparisons were performed using Bonferroni correction. RESULTS: In the primary outcomes, A-tDCS led to greater improvement in BIT-C after intervention (mean difference [MD] = 18.4, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 3.9-32.8, p = 0.008) compared to sham. However, no significant differences were observed between A-tDCS and C-tDCS (MD = 13.9, 95% CI = -0.3 to 28.1, p = 0.057), or C-tDCS and sham (MD = 4.5, 95% CI = -9.7 to 18.8, p = 0.99). There were no significant differences between groups in terms of secondary outcomes. INTERPRETATION: A-tDCS associated with physical therapy can decrease the severity of USN after stroke. However, these preliminary findings must be confirmed by collecting additional evidence in a larger phase 3 trial. ANN NEUROL 2022;92:400-410.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations19
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of NeurologySame topicSpatial Neglect and Hemispheric DysfunctionFrench-language works237,207