Clinical effects and correlates of standard rTMS and theta burst stimulation (TBS) on suicidal ideation in late-life depression
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Previous studies have shown that repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) can treat suicidal symptoms; however, the effects of rTMS on suicidal ideation (SI) in late-life depression (LLD) have not been well-characterized, particularly with theta burst stimulation (TBS). Methods Data were analyzed from 84 older adults with depression from the FOUR-D trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02998580), who received either bilateral standard rTMS or bilateral TBS targeting the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. The primary outcome was change in the Beck Scale for Suicide Ideation (SSI). The secondary outcome was remission of SI. Demographic, cognitive, and clinical characteristics that may moderate the effects of rTMS or TBS on SI were explored. Results There was a statistically significant change in the total SSI score over time [ χ 2 (7) = 136.018, p < 0.001], with no difference between the two treatment groups. Remission of SI was 55.8% in the standard rTMS group and 53.7% in the TBS group. In the standard rTMS group, there was no difference in remission of SI between males and females, whereas remission was higher in females in the TBS group (χ 2 (1) =6.87, p = 0.009). There was a significant correlation between time to remission of SI and RCI z -score for D-KEFS inhibition / switching [ r s = −0.389, p = 0.012]. Conclusions Both bilateral rTMS and bilateral TBS were effective in reducing SI in LLD. There may be sex differences in response to TBS, with females having more favorable response in reducing SI. There may be an association between improvement in cognitive flexibility and inhibition and reduction of SI.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".