Exploring the Effect of Single-Session Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on Attention, Verbal Fluency, and Working Memory in Patients With Alzheimer's Disease-Related Dementia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality among the elderly. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) applies low-intensity currents to the brain, resulting in short-term neurocognitive effects and long-term neuroplasticity enhancement. Limited research reported on the impact of tDCS on cognitive functions in dementia due to AD. This study aims to compare changes in verbal fluency and working memory following a single tDCS application to the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) in AD patients. METHODS: Patients with mild dementia due to AD underwent cognitive assessment using the Standardized Mini-Mental Test, Clock Drawing Test, Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test, Functional Activities Questionnaire, Informant Questionnaire on Cognitive Decline in the Elderly, and Montreal Cognitive Assessment Scale. A single-session tDCS was administered by applying anodal tDCS to the left DLPFC for a duration of 30 minutes. Verbal fluency and working memory were evaluated before and after tDCS using the WAIS-R Digit Span Test forward and backward subscales, Trail Making Test (TMT) A and B, and Verbal Fluency Test. RESULTS: Regarding cognitive test scores before and after tDCS application, there were statistically significant reductions in the durations of TMT-A and TMT-B. However, there were no significant differences observed for TMT B-A, VFT, DST-forward, and DST-backward performances. CONCLUSIONS: The findings indicate that a single anodal tDCS targeting the left DLPFC enhances attention and processing speed in AD patients but has no effect on working memory or verbal fluency.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".