Efficacy of a 24-week long term transcranial pulse stimulation (TPS) on cognition and brain structure in older adults with mild cognitive impairment (MCI)Efficacy of a 24-week long term transcranial pulse stimulation (TPS) on cognition and brain structure in older adults with mild cognitive impairment (MCI)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Transcranial Pulse Stimulation (TPS) is emerging as a possible add-on therapy for Alzheimer's disease (AD), showing positive short-term effects.However, long-term outcomes have not been extensively studied.In this study, we present findings from a one-year follow-up of ten Alzheimer's patients who underwent TPS treatment, focusing on cognitive domains such as memory, speech, orientation, visuoconstruction, and mood.The patients received an initial series of six TPS sessions over two weeks, followed by monthly booster sessions delivering 6000 pulses each, utilizing a stimulation pattern of targeting frontal, occipital, temporal, parietal, and precuneus regions.Neuropsychological assessments, including the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale (ADAS), Mini-Mental Status Examination (MMSE), Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), and Beck Depression Inventory (BDI-II), were conducted after the initial stimulation cycle and at 3, 6, and 12 months.The treatment was well-tolerated, with adverse events occurring in less than 1% of sessions, primarily as focal pain or discomfort, along with occasional behavioral or vigilance changes in patients with pre-existing medical conditions.Significant cognitive improvements were observed after the initial cycle, with stability in neuropsychological scores throughout the year.Remarkably, sustained enhancements were noted in memory, speech, and mood after one year of treatment.These findings suggest that TPS may provide a safe and effective long-term therapeutic option for AD patients, potentially stabilizing cognitive function and improving quality of life.Here, we specifically suggest a multifocal adoption of the stimulation pattern to increase effects on more cognitive domains, including the frontal, occipital, temporal, parietal and precuneus areas (F-TOP 2 ).
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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; 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".