Investigation of Neural Effects of Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation on Hot and Cold Cognitive Systems in Depression
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Cognitive impairment is a chronic feature of major depressive disorder (MDD), conceptualized as aberrant processing in hot (emotion-laden) and cold (emotion-independent) cognitive systems. While the clinical efficacy of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) for MDD has been established, its effects on cognition remain unclear. This thesis aimed to investigate the effect of rTMS on hot and cold cognition. Methods: MDD patients (N=24) received rTMS, completed cognitive assessments, and were evaluated for depressive symptoms. Matched healthy controls (HC) (N=33) were recruited. Results: Following rTMS, antidepressant effect was observed in MDD patients, while hot and cold cognition remained unchanged. A pre-rTMS cognitive phenotype for remitters emerged, suggesting greater sustained attention, free recall, and efficiency in facial expression identification, independent from clinical outcome. Conclusions: Findings suggest rTMS to be cognitively safe and clinically efficacious. A pre-rTMS cognitive phenotype for remitters was discovered, highlighting potential trait-markers indicative of future remission status.
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) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".