MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7017958300

Comparação entre protocolos de estimulação transcraniana por corrente contínua em mulheres com migrânea crônica: ensaio clínico, triplo-cego, placebo-controlado

2018· dissertation· en· W7017958300 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueLA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas) · 2018
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTranscranial direct-current stimulationWechsler Adult Intelligence ScaleBeck Depression InventoryBeck Anxiety InventoryAnxietyDepression (economics)CognitionQuality of life (healthcare)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The symptomatic picture of chronic migraine is quite broad with debilitating consequences and cognitive dysfunctions that impact the quality of life of the individual. In this context, transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) may be an adjunct to drug treatment, requiring a better standardization and definition of its application protocols. Objective: To analyze if the clinical and cognitive effects of tDCS, observed in patients with chronic migraine, vary according to the number and interval between sessions. Method: This study consisted of a triple-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial. The sample consisted of women aged between 20 and 45 years with diagnosis of chronic migraine. A sociodemographic, clinical questionnaire and the following outcomes were used: Headache Impact Test (HIT-6), Cumulative Illness Rating Scale (CIRS), Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), Trait-State Anxiety Inventory (IDATE), Montreal Cognitive Assessment, Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS-III), Hayling's Test, Letter Comparison and Pattern Comparison, Nine Hole Peg Test, D2 Test, Visual Attention Test, Trail Making Test Part B . The subjects enrolled in the study were randomly assigned to 3 groups: Group A: received a single session of tDCS for 15 minutes (protocol 1); Group B: received two 15-minutes sessions with an interval of 20 minutes between them (protocol 2); Group C: received sham current for 15 minutes. The anodic electrode was allocated over the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex region (DLPFC) and the reference electrode in the contralateral supraorbital region. The current had intensity of 2mA and was applied during 10 consecutive days, excluding the weekends. Results: We observed that anodic tDCS reduced the inability of migraine, stress level and cognitive decline. We also found an improvement in working memory and attention, executive functions, motor processing speed, and selective attention. However, the effects of tDCS on group B were not superior to group A and more adverse effects were reported. Conclusion: tDCS is a safe and effective adjuvant technique in patients with chronic migraine, but further studies are needed to standardize the protocol that is most appropriate for this population.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 designRandomized trial
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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas)→Same topicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies→French-language works237,207→