Intervention Effect of rTMS on Neural Activities in Obsessive/Compulsive Disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: While repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) has gained attention as an alternative treatment for obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), there is a lack of evidence regarding the mechanisms underlying the neural modifications induced by rTMS in OCD individuals. Our study investigates how rTMS influences neural oscillations and connectivity to address this gap by examining changes through coherence, relative power, and amplitude asymmetry analyses. From a cohort of 196 OCD individuals undergoing rTMS at a neuroscience clinic, we selected 12 participants who met our criteria. These participants received 20 sessions of bilateral dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC)-targeted rTMS. We assessed symptom severity using the Yale-Brown Obsessive-Compulsive Scale (Y-BOCS) and recorded their brain activity with a 19-channel EEG before and after the intervention. Our analysis employed coherence and amplitude asymmetry, revealing altered connectivity patterns, alongside conducting relative power analysis for insights into neural oscillation changes. The Y-BOCS scores demonstrated significant treatment efficacy. Connectivity outcomes underscored that rTMS effects exert a comprehensive influence on the broader brain network beyond the DLPFC. The relative power analysis also indicated increased Alpha frequency and decreased Beta3 and High beta bands. These findings can provide valuable insights into the changes in neural activity following rTMS intervention in OCD individuals.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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; 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".