MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4391050294 · doi:10.2196/52922

Motor Effects of Intervention With Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation for Physiotherapy Treatment in Children With Cerebral Palsy: Protocol for a Randomized Clinical Trial

2024· article· en· W4391050294 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Anna Izabel Cangussu, Beatriz Lucarini, Igor de Freitas Melo, Paula Araújo Diniz, Marisa Cotta Mancini, Bernardo de Mattos Viana, Marco Aurélio Romano‐Silva, Débora Marques de Miranda

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTranscranial direct-current stimulationCerebral palsyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationRehabilitationPhysical therapyRandomized controlled trialGross Motor Function Classification SystemGross motor skillMedicineActivities of daily livingBrain stimulationQuality of life (healthcare)Motor skillStimulationSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Children diagnosed with cerebral palsy (CP) often experience various limitations, particularly in gross motor function and activities of daily living. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a noninvasive brain stimulation technique that has been used to improve movement, gross motor function, and activities of daily living. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to evaluate the potential additional effects of physiotherapy combined with tDCS in children with CP in comparison with physiotherapy only. METHODS: This is a 2-arm randomized controlled trial that will compare the effects of tDCS as an adjunctive treatment during rehabilitation sessions to rehabilitation without tDCS. Children with CP classified by the Gross Motor Function Classification System as levels I and II will be randomly assigned to either the sham + rehabilitation group or the tDCS + rehabilitation group. The primary outcome will be the motor skills assessed using the Gross Motor Function Measure domain E scores, and the secondary outcome will be the measurement scores of the children's quality of life. The intervention will consist of a 10-day stimulation protocol with tDCS spread over 2 weeks, with stimulation or sham tDCS administered for 20 minutes at a frequency of 1 Hz, in combination with physiotherapy. Physical therapy exercises will be conducted in a circuit based on each child's baseline Gross Motor Function Measure results. The participants' changes will be evaluated and compared in both groups. Intervenient features will be tested. RESULTS: Data collection is ongoing and is expected to be completed by January 2025. A homogeneous sample and clear outcomes may be a highlight of this protocol, which may allow us to understand the potential use of tDCS and for whom it should or should not be used. CONCLUSIONS: A study with good evidence and clear outcomes in children with CP might open an avenue for the potential best use of neurostimulation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Brazilian Registry of Clinical Trials RBR-104h4s4y; https://tinyurl.com/47r3x2e4. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/52922.

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)0.032
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.030
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 score0.070
Threshold uncertainty score0.235

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0320.030
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0080.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0140.007
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0040.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0080.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0700.011

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 head0.218
GPT teacher head0.585
Teacher spread0.367 · 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research Protocols→Same topicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies→French-language works237,207→