Modulation of brain activity in brain-injured patients with a disorder of consciousness in intensive care with repeated 10-Hz transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS): a randomised controlled trial protocol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Therapeutic interventions for disorders of consciousness lack consistency; evidence supports non-invasive brain stimulation, but few studies assess neuromodulation in acute-to-subacute brain-injured patients. This study aims to validate the feasibility and assess the effect of a multi-session transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS) intervention in subacute brain-injured patients on recovery of consciousness, related brain oscillations and brain network dynamics. METHODS AND ANALYSES: The study is comprised of two phases: a validation phase (n=12) and a randomised controlled trial (n=138). Both phases will be conducted in medically stable brain-injured adult patients (traumatic brain injury and hypoxic-ischaemic encephalopathy), with a Glasgow Coma Scale score ≤12 after continuous sedation withdrawal. Recruitment will occur at the intensive care unit of a Level 1 Trauma Centre in Montreal, Quebec, Canada. The intervention includes a 20 min 10 Hz tACS at 1 mA intensity or a sham session over parieto-occipital cortical sites, repeated over five consecutive days. The current's frequency targets alpha brain oscillations (8-13 Hz), known to be associated with consciousness. Resting-state electroencephalogram (EEG) will be recorded four times daily for five consecutive days: pre and post-intervention, at 60 and 120 min post-tACS. Two additional recordings will be included: 24 hours and 1-week post-protocol. Multimodal measures (blood samples, pupillometry, behavioural consciousness assessments (Coma Recovery Scale-revised), actigraphy measures) will be acquired from baseline up to 1 week after the stimulation. EEG signal analysis will focus on the alpha bandwidth (8-13 Hz) using spectral and functional network analyses. Phone assessments at 3, 6 and 12 months post-tACS, will measure long-term functional recovery, quality of life and caregivers' burden. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval for this study has been granted by the Research Ethics Board of the CIUSSS du Nord-de-l'Île-de-Montréal (Project ID 2021-2279). The findings of this two-phase study will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed academic journal and submitted for presentation at conferences. The trial's results will be published on a public trial registry database (ClinicalTrials.gov). TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05833568.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.013 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.032 | 0.005 |
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".