Effect of High-Frequency Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation on Patients with Post-Stroke Comorbid Cognitive Impairment and Depression
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ObjectiveTo observe the effect of high-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) on patients with post-stroke comorbid cognitive impairment and depression (PSCCID).MethodsA total of 30 patients with PSCCID were treated in the department of rehabilitation medicine of Sichuan Academy of Medical Science and Sichuan Provincial People's Hospital from January 2018 to December 2020 were randomly divided into control group and observation group, with 15 cases in each group. The control group received routine medication treatment and routine rehabilitation, including exercise therapy (40 minutes a time, once a day, five days a week), occupational therapy (30 minutes a time, once a day, five days a week), and cognitive training (30 minutes a time, once a day, five days a week), for four weeks. The observation group received high-frequency rTMS treatment (stimulation of the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, 10 Hz, 100% resting motion threshold, 20 minutes a time, once a day, five days a week) for four weeks, in addition to the treatment received by the control group. Before and after treatment, the Montreal cognitive assessment (MoCA) and the mini-mental state examination (MMSE) scores were used to assess cognitive function. The 17-item Hamilton depression rating scale (HAMD-17) was used to assess depression. The 3.0T magnetic resonance imaging system was used to scan the patient's brain, and voxel-based morphological analysis was used to analyze the changes of gray matter density in local brain areas.ResultsCompared with those before treatment, the MMSE and MoCA scores were higher and the HAMD-17 score was lower in both groups after treatment, and the differences were statistically significant (<italic>P</italic><0.05). Compared with the control group, the MMSE and MoCA scores were higher in the observation group after treatment, and the HAMD-17 score were lower, and the differences were statistically significant (<italic>P</italic><0.05). Compared with the control group, gray matter density in the left head and face regions of precentral gyrus, and the left caudal area of middle temporal gyrus of the observation group were higher, while gray matter density in the left medioventral occipital cortex and right middle frontal gyrus were lower, and the difference was statistically significant (<italic>P</italic><0.05).ConclusionHigh-frequency rTMS can improve cognitive function and depression of patients with PSCCID, and the mechanism may be related to the increase of the gray matter density in local brain regions.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".