MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392358224 · doi:10.1503/jpn.230063

Navigated and individual α-peak-frequency–guided transcranial magnetic stimulation in male patients with treatment-refractory schizophrenia

2024· article· en· W4392358224 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Heli Tuppurainen, Sara Määttä, Mervi Könönen, Petro Julkunen, Hannu Kautiainen, Soile Hyvärinen, Olli Vaurio, Mikko Joensuu, Matti Vanhanen, Kati Aho‐Mustonen, Esa Mervaala, Jari Tiihonen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Psychiatry and Neuroscience · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTranscranial magnetic stimulationClinical Global ImpressionSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)Positive and Negative Syndrome ScalePsychologyDorsolateral prefrontal cortexPsychopathologyInternal medicineMedicinePrefrontal cortexStimulationPsychiatryNeurosciencePsychosisCognitionPlacebo

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Previous electroencephalography (EEG) studies have indicated altered brain oscillatory α-band activity in schizophrenia, and treatment with repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) using individualized α-frequency has shown therapeutic effects. Magnetic resonance imaging–based neuronavigation methods allow stimulation of a specific cortical region and improve targeting of rTMS; therefore, we sought to study the efficacy of navigated, individual α-peak-frequency–guided rTMS (αTMS) on treatment-refractory schizophrenia. Methods: We recruited medication-refractory male patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder in this doubleblind, sham-controlled study. We randomized patients to a 3-week course of either active αTMS or sham stimulation applied to the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC). We assessed participants with the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) and the Clinical Global Impression Scale (CGI) at baseline and after treatment. We conducted a follow-up assessment with the PANSS 3 months after intervention. Results: We included 44 patients. After treatment, we observed a significantly higher PANSS total score ( p = 0.029), PANSS general psychopathology score ( p = 0.027) and PANSS 5-factor model cognitive–disorganized factor score ( p = 0.011) in the αTMS group than the sham group. In addition, the CGI–Improvement score was significantly higher among those who received αTMS compared with sham stimulation ( p = 0.048). Limitations: The limited number of study participants included only male patients. Depression was not formally evaluated. Conclusion: Navigated αTMS to the left DLPFC reduced total, general psychopathological, and cognitive–disorganized symptoms of schizophrenia. These results provide evidence for the therapeutic efficacy of individual α-peak-frequency–guided rTMS in treatment-refractory schizophrenia. Clinical trial registration: NCT01941251; ClinicalTrials.gov

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 designNon-randomized trial
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

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Psychiatry and NeuroscienceSame topicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation StudiesFrench-language works237,207