Effects of electroacupuncture on cognitive symptoms in major depressive disorder: a pilot study and randomized controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<ns3:p>Objectives To investigate the impact of electroacupuncture on cognitive function, quality of life (QoL), and depression severity in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD). Methods This double-blinded randomized controlled trial included 60 participants aged 18-55 with cognitive symptoms related to MDD at Thammasat University Hospital. Participants were divided into two groups: the electroacupuncture group combined with standard antidepressant treatment (EG; n=30) and the control group receiving standard care with placebo acupuncture (CG; n=30). The study assessed 1) executive functions using the Trail making test- B and Stroop Color and Word Test, 2) delayed recall, and 3) subjective cognitive complaint and Quality of life (QoL) using WHODAS 2.0. Depressive symptoms were measured using the Thai version of the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9). Baseline and post-intervention assessments were conducted over 10 weeks. Mann-Whitney U test analyzed treatment effects by comparing median differences between groups. Results Both groups exhibited similar demographics and cognitive traits. Cognitive improvement was observed in both groups at the endpoint. Intention-to-treat analysis revealed significantly higher median scores for subjective cognitive complaints in the EG compared to the CG (EG: Median = 5.5, CG: Median = 0.0, p=0.049). No serious side effects were identified from either electroacupuncture or placebo acupuncture. Conclusions Electroacupuncture improved subjective complaints in MDD patients with cognitive symptoms, but did not show effects on specific cognitive functions, QoL, or depressive symptoms. This study provides initial evidence supporting the potential of electroacupuncture in MDD patients with cognitive symptoms, suggesting opportunities for further research. Trial registration NCT06239740, February 2, 2024, ClinicalTrials.gov.</ns3:p>
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 | 0.003 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| 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".