MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4313655558 · doi:10.1016/j.nicl.2023.103324

Lack of effects of four-week theta burst stimulation on white matter macro/microstructure in children and adolescents with autism

2023· article· en· W4313655558 on OpenAlexafffund
Hsing‐Chang Ni, Yi‐Ping Chao, Rung-Yu Tseng, Chen‐Te Wu, Luca Cocchi, Tai‐Li Chou, Rou-Shayn Chen, Susan Shur‐Fen Gau, Chun‐Hung Yeh, Hsiang‐Yuan Lin

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuroImage Clinical · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced Neuroimaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
FundersDepartment of Psychiatry, University of TorontoMinistry of Science and Technology, TaiwanChang Gung Memorial Hospital, LinkouChang Gung Medical FoundationUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsWhite matterPsychologyStimulationDiffusion MRITranscranial magnetic stimulationAutismMagnetic resonance imagingRandomized controlled trialAudiologyMedicineNeuroscienceAnesthesiaInternal medicineDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Following the published behavioral and cognitive results of this single-blind parallel sham-controlled randomized clinical trial, the current study aimed to explore the impact of intermittent theta burst stimulation (iTBS), a variant of excitatory transcranial magnetic stimulation, over the bilateral posterior superior temporal sulci (pSTS) on white matter macro/microstructure in intellectually able children and adolescents with autism. Participants were randomized and blindly received active or sham iTBS for 4 weeks (the single-blind sham-controlled phase). Then, all participants continued to receive active iTBS for another 4 weeks (the open-label phase). The clinical results were published elsewhere. Here, we present diffusion magnetic resonance imaging data on potential changes in white matter measures after iTBS. Twenty-two participants in Active-Active group and 27 participants in Sham-Active group underwent multi-shell high angular resolution diffusion imaging (64-direction for b = 2000 & 1000 s/mm2, respectively) at baseline, week 4, and week 8. With longitudinal fixel-based analysis, we found no white matter changes following iTBS from baseline to week 4 (a null treatment by time interaction and a null within-group paired comparison in the Active-Active group), nor from baseline to week 8 (null within-group paired comparisons in both Active-Active and Sham-Active groups). As for the brain-symptoms relationship, we did not find baseline white matter metrics associated with symptom changes at week 4 in either group. Our results raise the question of what the minimal cumulative stimulation dose required to induce the white matter plasticity is.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.434

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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.322 · 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

Citations11
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuroImage ClinicalSame topicAdvanced Neuroimaging Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207