Video_1_Combination of anodal tDCS of the cerebellum with a goal-oriented motor training to treat cervical dystonia: a pilot case series.WMV
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) of the cerebellum shows promise for the treatment of dystonia. Specific motor rehabilitation programs have also been developed in this context. However, the combination of these two approaches has not yet been evaluated to determine their therapeutic potential. Methods We report a series of 5 patients with cervical dystonia (CD) poorly controlled by botulinum toxin injections. They were initially treated by a protocol of repeated daily sessions (for 3 or 5 days) of cerebellar anodal tDCS (cer-atDCS) applied alone. In a second time, additional protocols of cer-atDCS were performed in combination with a program of goal-oriented motor training exercises (Mot-Training), specifically developed for the treatment of CD. The clinical impact of the procedures was assessed on the Toronto Western Spasmodic Torticollis Rating Scale (TWSTRS). Results Compared to baseline, the maximum percentage of TWSTRS total score improvement was 37% on average after cer-atDCS performed alone (p = 0.147, not significant) and 53% on average after cer-atDCS combined with Mot-Training (p = 0.014, significant). The TWSTRS pain and functional handicap subscores also improved after the combined protocol. A score of (+3) to (+5) was rated on the TWSTRS response scale after cer-atDCS performed alone or the combined protocol, corresponding to a moderate to striking improvement on dystonia and pain. This improvement lasted longer after the combined protocol than after cer-atDCS alone (3.4 vs. 1.4 months on average, p = 0.011). Conclusion The combination of cer-atDCS with Mot-Training produced a greater and more prolonged improvement than the application of cer-atDCS alone. Such a combined therapeutic procedure is easy to perform and opens important perspectives in the long-term treatment of CD. These results remain to be confirmed by a randomized sham-controlled trial on a larger sample.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.026 | 0.003 |
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".