MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4384818583 · doi:10.1111/cns.14372

Transcranial pulse stimulation in Alzheimer's disease

2023· review· en· W4384818583 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCNS Neuroscience & Therapeutics · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMontreal Cognitive AssessmentCochrane LibraryTranscranial magnetic stimulationMedicinePhysical medicine and rehabilitationPsychologyCognitionNeuroscienceDementiaDiseaseRandomized controlled trialInternal medicineStimulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Transcranial pulse stimulation (TPS) is a novel noninvasive ultrasonic brain stimulation that can increase cortical and corticospinal excitability, induce neuroplasticity, and increase functional connectivity within the brain. Several trials have confirmed its potential in treating Alzheimer's disease (AD). OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effect and safety of TPS on AD. DESIGN: A systematic review. METHODS: PubMed, Embase via Ovid, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, CNKI (China National Knowledge Infrastructure), VIP (China Science and Technology Journal Database), and WanFang were searched from inception to April 1, 2023. Study selection, data extraction, and quality evaluation of the studies were conducted by two reviewers independently, with any controversy resolved by consensus. The Methodological Index for Nonrandomized Studies was used to assess the risk of bias. RESULTS: Five studies were included in this review, with a total of 99 patients with AD. For cognitive performance, TPS significantly improved the scores of the CERAD (Consortium to Establish a Registry for Alzheimer's Disease) test battery, Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale (cognitive), Montreal Cognitive Assessment, and Mini-Mental Status Examination. For depressive symptoms, TPS significantly reduced the scores of the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale (affective), Geriatric Depression Score, and Beck Depression Inventory. By functional magnetic resonance imaging, studies have shown that TPS improved cognitive performance in AD patients by increasing functional connectivity in the hippocampus, parahippocampal cortex, precuneus, and parietal cortex, and activating cortical activity in the bilateral hippocampus. TPS alleviated depressive symptoms in AD patients by decreasing functional connectivity between the ventromedial network (left frontal orbital cortex) and the salience network (right anterior insula). Adverse events in this review, including headache, worsening mood, jaw pain, nausea, and drowsiness, were reversible and lasted no longer than 1 day. No serious adverse events or complications were observed. CONCLUSIONS: TPS is promising in improving cognitive performance and reducing depressive symptoms in patients with AD. TPS may be a safe adjunct therapy in the treatment of AD. However, these findings lacked a sham control and were limited by the small sample size of the included studies. Further research may be needed to better explore the potential of TPS. PATIENT AND PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT: Patients and the public were not involved in this study.

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.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.992
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.318
GPT teacher head0.415
Teacher spread0.097 · 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