268 Rev Psychiatr Neurosci 2004;29(4) © 2004 Canadian Medical Association
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is a noninvasive tool used to manipulate activity in specific neural circuits of the human brain. Clinical studies suggest that, in some patients with major de-pression, rTMS has the potential to alleviate symptoms that may be related to functional abnormalities in a frontocingulate circuit. This paper reviews the rationale for the use of rTMS in this context. The follow-ing topics are discussed: symptoms and cognition in major depression, with special emphasis on the initia-tion of speech; neuroimaging studies of depression; rTMS as treatment for depression; structure and func-tion of the mid-dorsolateral frontal and anterior cingulate cortices; and combined TMS/positron emission tomography studies of frontocortical connectivity. La stimulation magnétique transcrânienne répétitive (SMTr) est un outil non effractif utilisé pour mani-puler l’activité de circuits neuraux précis du cerveau humain. Les études cliniques indiquent que chez cer-tains patients aux prises avec une dépression majeure, la SMTr peut atténuer les symptômes pouvant être reliés à des anomalies fonctionnelles dans un circuit frontocingulaire. Cette communication passe en re-vue la justification de l’utilisation de la SMTr dans ce contexte. On aborde les sujets suivants: symptômes et cognition en cas de dépression majeure, avec accent sur l’initiation de la parole; étude de la dépression par neuro-imagerie; SMTr comme traitement de la dépression; structure et fonction des cortex cingu-laires frontal et antérieur mésodorsolatéral; et étude de la connectivité frontocorticale par SMT et tomo-graphie par émission de positrons combinées. CRSN Symposium: Focus on Depression, Part II Symposium du CRSN: le point sur la dépression, deuxième partie Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) of the human frontal cortex: implications for repetitive TMS treatment of depression
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.188 | 0.066 |
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".