MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410478360 · doi:10.1016/j.jad.2025.119430

Choroidal thickening and temporal RNFL thinning in TRD patients: no structural retinal changes following TMS treatment

2025· article· en· W4410478360 on OpenAlexaff
Beyazıt Garip, Süleyman Demir, Hakan Kayır

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Affective Disorders · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRetinal Development and Disorders
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRetinalThickeningThinningOphthalmologyMedicineBiologyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Treatment-resistant depression (TRD) is a particularly challenging subset of major depressive disorder (MDD), often unresponsive to conventional antidepressants. Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is recognized as an effective and reliable alternative treatment for patients with TRD. However, the effects of long-term functional changes induced by TMS treatment on retinal structures remain unclear. In this prospective study, a total of 32 patients with TRD were evaluated for retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL), macula and choroidal thickness changes before and after TMS treatment. Patients received either intermittent theta burst stimulation (iTBS) or repetitive TMS (rTMS) targeting the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. The protocol consisted of five days a week, with a total of 20 daily sessions over four weeks. Retinal measurements, including central macula thickness, RNFL, and choroidal thickness, were conducted using Spectral Domain Optical Coherence Tomography (SD-OCT) and enhanced depth imaging (EDI) mode. TRD patients had thicker choroids in both eyes and reduced left eye temporal RNFL thickness compared to healthy controls (p values<0.05). TMS treatment did not produce significant changes in RNFL, macula, or choroidal thicknesses overall (p values>0.05). TRD patients exhibited significant changes in choroid and RNFL thickness, as measured by OCT imaging. TMS treatment did not result in significant alterations in these retinal measurements overall, but some retinal measurements may be affected under specific conditions such as gender, antidepressant drug type, and additional drug use. Further research focusing on these subgroups is necessary to better understand the effects of TMS on retinal structures.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.003
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.243 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Affective DisordersSame topicRetinal Development and DisordersFrench-language works237,207