MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4294989698 · doi:10.3390/brainsci12091185

Effects of Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation on Gait and Postural Control Ability of Patients with Executive Dysfunction after Stroke

2022· article· en· W4294989698 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Huixian Yu, Sihao Liu, Pei Dai, Zhaoxia Wang, Changbin Liu, Hao Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueBrain Sciences · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicStroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCapital Medical UniversityNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsStroop effectTranscranial magnetic stimulationMedicineStroke (engine)Physical medicine and rehabilitationGaitRehabilitationBerg Balance ScaleTimed Up and Go testTrail Making TestPhysical therapyAudiologyPsychologyCognitionStimulationBalance (ability)Cognitive impairmentInternal medicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: To assess the effects of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) on the gait and postural control ability of patients with executive dysfunction (ED) after stroke. Methods: A total of 18 patients with ED after stroke were randomly assigned into two groups, including an experimental group and a sham group. Patients in both groups received routine rehabilitation therapy, and patients in the experimental group underwent rTMS on the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) for 2 weeks (5 HZ, 80%MT, 1200 pulses). In the sham group, patients experienced sham stimulation treatment, in which the coil was placed vertically with the head. Before and after treatment, patients in both groups were subjected to Montreal cognitive assessment (MoCA) scoring, Fugl−Meyer assessment of lower extremity (L-FMA), Stroop color-word test (SCWT), gait analysis, foot plantar pressure test, 10-m walking test (10MWT), Berg balance scale (BBS), and timed up and go test (TUGT). In the SCWT, it was attempted to record the time of each card (SCWT-T), the correct number (SCWT-C), Stroop interference effect-time (SIE-T), and SIE correct count (SIE-C). The TUGT was categorized into four stages: getting up (GT), walking straight (WT), turning around (TT), and sitting down (ST), in which the total time of TUGT was calculated. Results: After two weeks of treatment, the evaluation indexes were improved in the two groups, some of which were statistically significant. In the experimental group, SCWT-T, SIE-T, SIE-C, GT, WT, TT, ST, and TUGT were significantly improved after treatment (p < 0.05). SCWT-C, L-FMA score, 10MWT, GT, WT, stride length, step width, foot plantar pressure, pressure center curve, and activities of daily living were not statistically different from those before treatment (p > 0.05). After treatment, SCWT-T, SIE-C, SIE-T, BBS score, TT, and ST in the experimental group were significantly shorter than those before treatment, with statistical differences (p < 0.05). Compared with the sham group, SCWT-C, L-FMA score, 10MWT, GT, WT, TUGT, stride length, step width, foot plantar pressure, pressure center curve, and motor skills were not significantly improved (p > 0.05). Conclusion: It was revealed that post-stroke rTMS treatment of patients with ED could improve executive function, improve postural control function, and reduce the risk of falling. In addition, rTMS of DLPFC could be a therapeutic target for improving postural control ability and reducing the risk of falling.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.188

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.217 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations30
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBrain SciencesSame topicStroke Rehabilitation and RecoveryFrench-language works237,207