MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4379231939 · doi:10.3389/fnhum.2023.1168673

Tele-supervised home-based transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS) for Alzheimer’s disease: a pilot study

2023· article· en· W4379231939 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Davide Cappon, R. Hingston Fox, Tim den Boer, Wanting Yu, Nicole LaGanke, Gabriele Cattaneo, Ruben Perellón‐Alfonso, David Bartrés‐Faz, Brad Manor, Álvaro Pascual‐Leone

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Human Neuroscience · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTranscranial alternating current stimulationEpisodic memoryMedicineAdverse effectMontreal Cognitive AssessmentCognitionPsychologyCognitive impairmentTranscranial magnetic stimulationStimulationInternal medicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Over 55 million people worldwide are currently diagnosed with Alzheimer's disease (AD) and live with debilitating episodic memory deficits. Current pharmacological treatments have limited efficacy. Recently, transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS) has shown memory improvement in AD by normalizing high-frequency neuronal activity. Here we investigate the feasibility, safety, and preliminary effects on episodic memory of an innovative protocol where tACS is administered within the homes of older adults with AD with the help of a study companion (HB-tACS). Methods: Eight participants diagnosed with AD underwent multiple consecutive sessions of high-definition HB-tACS (40 Hz, 20-min) targeting the left angular gyrus (AG), a key node of the memory network. The Acute Phase comprised 14-weeks of HB-tACS with at least five sessions per week. Three participants underwent resting state electroencephalography (EEG) before and after the 14-week Acute Phase. Subsequently, participants completed a 2-3-month Hiatus Phase not receiving HB-tACS. Finally, in the Taper phase, participants received 2-3 sessions per week over 3-months. Primary outcomes were safety, as determined by the reporting of side effects and adverse events, and feasibility, as determined by adherence and compliance with the study protocol. Primary clinical outcomes were memory and global cognition, measured with the Memory Index Score (MIS) and Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), respectively. Secondary outcome was EEG theta/gamma ratio. Results reported as mean ± SD. Results: All participants completed the study, with an average of 97 HB-tACS sessions completed by each participant; reporting mild side effects during 25% of sessions, moderate during 5%, and severe during 1%. Acute Phase adherence was 98 ± 6.8% and Taper phase was 125 ± 22.3% (rates over 100% indicates participants completed more than the minimum of 2/week). After the Acute Phase, all participants showed memory improvement, MIS of 7.25 ± 3.77, sustained during Hiatus 7.00 ± 4.90 and Taper 4.63 ± 2.39 Phases compared to baseline. For the three participants that underwent EEG, a decreased theta/gamma ratio in AG was observed. Conversely, participants did not show improvement in the MoCA, 1.13 ± 3.80 after the Acute Phase, and there was a modest decrease during the Hiatus -0.64 ± 3.28 and Taper -2.56 ± 5.03 Phases. Conclusion: This pilot study shows that the home-based, remotely-supervised, study companion administered, multi-channel tACS protocol for older adults with AD was feasible and safe. Further, targeting the left AG, memory in this sample was improved. These are preliminary results that warrant larger more definite trials to further elucidate tolerability and efficacy of the HB-tACS intervention. NCT04783350. Clinical trial registration: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04783350?term=NCT04783350&draw=2&rank=1, identifier NCT04783350.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.361
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.161
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.200 · 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.

Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations25
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Human NeuroscienceSame topicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation StudiesFrench-language works237,207