MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4380883944 · doi:10.1002/alz.066899

PAS‐MCI: Design and rationale for a randomized controlled trial to enhance prefrontal cortical plasticity and working memory in individuals with amnestic mild cognitive impairment

2023· article· en· W4380883944 on OpenAlexaff
François Genadry, Nicole Ledwos, Sanjeev Kumar, Christopher R. Bowie, Zafiris J. Daskalakis, Corinne E. Fischer, Nathan Herrmann, Benoit H. Mulsant, Bruce G. Pollock, Reza Zomorrodi, Daniel M. Blumberger, Tarek K. Rajji

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreSt. Michael's HospitalQueen's UniversityToronto Dementia Research AllianceUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science CentreCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWorking memoryDorsolateral prefrontal cortexPsychologyNeuroplasticityPrefrontal cortexNeuroscienceTranscranial direct-current stimulationTranscranial magnetic stimulationDementiaBrain stimulationCognitionExecutive functionsMedicineStimulationDiseaseInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Amnestic Mild Cognitive Impairment (aMCI) is a prodromal stage to Alzheimer’s disease dementia (AD). Improving prefrontal cortical function in individuals with MCI could prevent progression from aMCI to AD. A key mechanism that has been linked to memory formation is cortical plasticity. Paired Associative Stimulation (PAS) is an intervention that uses transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) to enhance cortical plasticity. When delivered to the prefrontal cortex in individuals with AD, it has shown promise to improve prefrontal cortical plasticity and working memory. PAS‐MCI is a randomized controlled trial (RCT) that aims to assess: (1) dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) plasticity in individuals with aMCI compared to cognitively unimpaired control (CU) participants, (2) the efficacy of PAS delivered for 10 days bilaterally to the DLPFC of individuals with aMCI in enhancing their DLPFC plasticity, working memory, and executive function, and (3) whether changes in DLPFC plasticity mediate changes in working memory and executive function. 100 aMCI and 50 CU control participants will be assessed clinically and cognitively, and undergo PAS combined with electroencephalography (PAS‐EEG) to characterize left DLPFC plasticity. The aMCI participants are randomized (1:1) to receive 10 daily sessions of either active or sham PAS delivered to the bilateral DLPFC. On Day 0, 7, and 28 following the PAS course, participants undergo repeat cognitive testing and PAS‐EEG to assess changes in working memory, executive function, and left DLPFC plasticity. As of February 1st, 2022, 14 aMCI and 9 CU participants consented, of which 5 aMCI and 4 CU participants completed the study. 7 aMCI participants were excluded because of: a contraindication for TMS (n = 1), having dementia (n = 1), and having non‐amnestic MCI (n = 5); 1 withdrew due to fatigue; and 1 is pending enrollment. 3 CU participants were excluded because of low cognitive scores; 1 withdrew due to not tolerating TMS; and 1 is pending enrollment. If successful, this RCT will establish the short‐term efficacy of PAS, a new TMS approach to enhance prefrontal cortical function in individuals with aMCI. A follow‐up longer‐term trial will be then needed to assess whether PAS could prevent cognitive decline and progression to AD.

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)0.049
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.042
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: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.049
Threshold uncertainty score0.258

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0490.042
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0050.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0100.005
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0080.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.002

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.309
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
GenreProtocol

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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & Dementia→Same topicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies→French-language works237,207→