MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4390201477 · doi:10.1002/alz.079436

Investigating the effects of aerobic exercise primed anodal transcranial direct current stimulation on γ‐aminobutyric acid concentrations in mild vascular cognitive impairment

2023· article· en· W4390201477 on OpenAlexaffabout
Melissa H. Wong, Jamie Near, Shankar Tumati, Amish Gaur, Mehreen Siddiqui, Damien Gallagher, Paul Oh, Susan Marzolini, Sandra E. Black, Walter Swardfager, Simon J. Graham, Joel Ramirez, Ana C. Andreazza, Mark Rapoport, Giovanni Marotta, Nathan Herrmann, Maged Goubran, Tarek K. Rajji, Krista L. Lanctôt

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
Canadian institutionsCentre for Addiction and Mental HealthToronto Dementia Research AllianceUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health NetworkSunnybrook HospitalHealth Sciences CentreToronto Rehabilitation InstituteSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTranscranial direct-current stimulationCognitionMontreal Cognitive AssessmentPsychologyNeurosciencegamma-Aminobutyric acidEffects of sleep deprivation on cognitive performanceCognitive declineMedicineStimulationInternal medicineDementiaCognitive impairmentReceptor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Mild vascular cognitive impairment (mVCI) is characterized by minor deficits in cognition and memory due to underlying vascular pathology. Anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (atDCS), a non‐invasive neuromodulation technique, has been demonstrated to improve cognition. The effects of atDCS have been suggested to be mediated by γ‐aminobutyric acid (GABA)–a major inhibitory neurotransmitter associated with cerebral perfusion and oxygenation, and cognition and memory. However, previous studies have reported mixed results regarding changes in GABA concentrations following atDCS. Physical activity has been reported to increase cortical GABA levels, and in particular, aerobic exercise (AE) is associated with improved cognition in older adults. Preliminary data from an ongoing trial (EXPRESS‐V) was used to evaluate whether GABA concentration in the motor cortex was altered following AE and/or atDCS and whether this was associated with changes in global cognition in mVCI. Method In this double‐blind, randomized clinical trial, participants received one of four interventions for two weeks: AE and atDCS, AE and sham atDCS, exercise education and atDCS, or exercise education and sham atDCS. mVCI was determined based on a modified Gorelick criteria. At baseline and endpoint, GABA concentration in the motor cortex was measured using magnetic resonance spectroscopy and quantified with the Mescher‐Garwood point resolved spectroscopy pulse sequence, and global cognition was assessed using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment. Wilcoxon signed rank test was used to determine changes in GABA concentrations (ΔGABA). Spearman correlation was used to determine the association between ΔGABA and changes in global cognition (ΔMoCA). Result Ten participants have enrolled so far, with nine participants having completed the study (22.2% female, age = 66.4(9.8), years of education = 8.8(3.4), 55.6% White, baseline MoCA score = 22.8(3.1)). To date, ΔGABA was insignificant between baseline and endpoint (Z = 23.0, p = 0.953). However, a positive trend between ΔGABA and ΔMoCA was observed (ρ = 0.650, p = 0.058). Conclusion Preliminary results from nine participants showed a positive trend between ΔGABA and ΔMoCA. Since the trial is ongoing, with the target of recruiting 80 participants by 2024, analyses on unblinded data upon study completion will determine whether AE and atDCS leads to greater ΔGABA, and whether this is accompanied by greater ΔMoCA in mVCI.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.253 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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