MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4384943004 · doi:10.1159/000531860

Neuromodulation of Executive Dysfunction in Patients with Acute Stroke Using Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation: Study Protocol for a Triple-Blind, Randomized Sham-Controlled Trial

2023· article· en· W4384943004 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Laura Amaya‐Pascasio, José García-Pinteño, Ana Sánchez-Kuhn, Cristina Uceda Sánchez, Pilar Fernández-Martín, José Juan León, Rocio Rodríguez-Herrera, Pilar Flores, Patricia Martínez‐Sánchez

Bibliographic record

VenueCerebrovascular Diseases · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTranscranial direct-current stimulationMontreal Cognitive AssessmentMedicineWisconsin Card Sorting TestModified Rankin ScalePhysical medicine and rehabilitationExecutive functionsStroke (engine)Memory spanRandomized controlled trialExecutive dysfunctionDorsolateral prefrontal cortexTrail Making TestCognitive flexibilityPhysical therapyCognitionPrefrontal cortexWorking memoryNeuropsychologyInternal medicinePsychiatryStimulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Research on the benefits of non-invasive brain stimulation in stroke patients to improve executive functions is scarce. The objective of this study was to investigate the effectiveness of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) in combination with cognitive training for the rehabilitation of executive functions in acute and subacute stroke patients as well as to explore the underlying physiological mechanisms. A triple-blinded, randomized-controlled clinical trial will be conducted involving 60 stroke patients with frontal or basal ganglia lesions and a Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) score less than 26. Participants will be randomly assigned to receive active tDCS (anode over the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, cathode at the right supraorbital region, 20 min at 2 mA) or sham tDCS in a 1:1 ratio for 10 sessions, followed by targeted executive function training. The primary efficacy outcome will be the MoCA score, while secondary outcomes will include the five-digit test (inhibitory control), the Digit Span Task (working memory), the abbreviated version of the Wisconsin Card Sorting test (cognitive flexibility), modified Rankin scale (functional state), Beck-II depression inventory, apathy evaluation scale, and the WHOQOL-BREF (quality of life), assessed immediately after the intervention and at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months post-intervention. Additionally, resting-state functional connectivity and blood biomarkers, such as neurotrophins, growth factors, and inflammatory molecules, will be evaluated before and after the intervention. This study will contribute to the investigation of the efficacy of tDCS in rehabilitating executive functions in acute and subacute stroke patients. The multidimensional approach utilized in this study, which includes analysis of resting-state connectivity and neuroplasticity-related blood biomarkers, is expected to provide insights into the underlying brain mechanisms involved in the rehabilitation of dysexecutive syndrome.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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 score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.108

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0070.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0130.004
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0060.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0320.008

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.286 · 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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCerebrovascular DiseasesSame topicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation StudiesFrench-language works237,207