Non-invasive brain stimulation for fatigue in post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 (PASC)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: and purpose: Fatigue is among the most common persistent symptoms following post-acute sequelae of Sars-COV-2 infection (PASC). The current study investigated the potential therapeutic effects of High-Definition transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (HD-tDCS) associated with rehabilitation program for the management of PASC-related fatigue. METHODS: Seventy patients with PASC-related fatigue were randomized to receive 3 mA or sham HD-tDCS targeting the left primary motor cortex (M1) for 30 min paired with a rehabilitation program. Each patient underwent 10 sessions (2 sessions/week) over five weeks. Fatigue was measured as the primary outcome before and after the intervention using the Modified Fatigue Impact Scale (MFIS). Pain level, anxiety severity and quality of life were secondary outcomes assessed, respectively, through the McGill Questionnaire, Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAM-A) and WHOQOL. RESULTS: Active HD-tDCS resulted in significantly greater reduction in fatigue compared to sham HD-tDCS (mean group MFIS reduction of 22.11 points vs 10.34 points). Distinct effects of HD-tDCS were observed in fatigue domains with greater effect on cognitive (mean group difference 8.29 points; effect size 1.1; 95% CI 3.56-13.01; P < .0001) and psychosocial domains (mean group difference 2.37 points; effect size 1.2; 95% CI 1.34-3.40; P < .0001), with no significant difference between the groups in the physical subscale (mean group difference 0.71 points; effect size 0.1; 95% CI 4.47-5.90; P = .09). Compared to sham, the active HD-tDCS group also had a significant reduction in anxiety (mean group difference 4.88; effect size 0.9; 95% CI 1.93-7.84; P < .0001) and improvement in quality of life (mean group difference 14.80; effect size 0.7; 95% CI 7.87-21.73; P < .0001). There was no significant difference in pain (mean group difference -0.74; no effect size; 95% CI 3.66-5.14; P = .09). CONCLUSION: An intervention with M1 targeted HD-tDCS paired with a rehabilitation program was effective in reducing fatigue and anxiety, while improving quality of life in people with PASC.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".