ATENÇÃO, MEMÓRIA E NOMEAÇÃO DIRETAMENTE BENEFICIADOS POR ESTIMULAÇÃO MAGNÉTICA TRANSCRANIANA APÓS ACIDENTE VASCULAR CEREBRAL
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Changes in cognitive function are common sequelae following a stroke. These alterations represent a significant demand for rehabilitation services that have used Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS) to improve motor functions and mood in post-stroke patients. In addition to its non-invasive nature, there is evidence that this technique positively alters cognitive processes. This study aimed to investigate the effect of TMS on the cognition of patients who have suffered a stroke. The study was assessed and approved by the Ethics Committee under protocol 54977216.3.0000.5078. This was an observational, prospective, cross-sectional study involving 30 patients aged between 24 and 74 who had a stroke. Participants were selected from the Neuromodulation Service at a Specialized Rehabilitation Centre. All participants were assessed using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MOCA), a cognitive screening to detect mild cognitive impairment, and which has been used in the context of stroke and other acquired injuries. The patients underwent a TMS protocol of 20-minute sessions twice a week. The total scores obtained by the participants in the MOCA test at previous and post-intervention 19.43±3.71 and 21.30±4.25 demonstrated a significant improvement. We also observed an improvement in the attention, memory, and naming subtests: 3.20±1.49; 2.10±1.63; 2.10±1.63 in contrast to 3.77±1.48; 2.97±1.88; 2.67±0.61 in the previous and post-intervention periods, respectively (p <0.05). These results suggest that TMS can improve general cognitive performance, particularly in attention, memory, and naming tasks in post-stroke patients.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".