ArticleBMC psychiatry2025
Personalized EEG-guided brain stimulation targeting in major depression via network controllability and multi-objective optimization.
Article in BMC psychiatry, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- From Monoamines to Systems Psychiatry: Rewiring Depression Science and Care (1960s-2025).Biomedicines · 2025Article
- LPGGNet: Learning from Local-Partition-Global Graph Representations for Motor Imagery EEG Recognition.Brain sciences · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMajor depressive disorder (MDD) is associated with widespread disruptions in brain network dynamics. Although noninvasive brain stimulation (NIBS) has shown promise as an alternative treatment, its efficacy remains limited due to a lack of individualized targeting strategies that account for functional and topological heterogeneity in brain networks.
methodsThis study developed a novel EEG-based framework to personalize NIBS strategies in MDD. Resting-state EEG data from 30 healthy controls and 34 MDD patients were analyzed. Functional connectivity was estimated across five frequency bands using phase locking value (PLV), amplitude envelope correlation (AEC), and weighted phase lag index (wPLI). Spectral graph embedding and structural controllability theory were applied to identify candidate stimulation targets. A multi-objective optimization algorithm (NSGA-II) was used to select optimal node-frequency-amplitude combinations minimizing control energy while maximizing network efficiency gain and structural restoration. Kuramoto-based neural simulations were conducted to evaluate stimulation efficacy in silico, quantifying changes in global synchrony, modularity, and local efficiency.
resultsMDD patients exhibited hyperconnectivity in PLV and AEC and reduced wPLI compared to controls. Control nodes in MDD were more centrally distributed, particularly around Cz in alpha and beta bands. NSGA-II optimization yielded subject-specific stimulation strategies with favorable trade-offs. Simulated stimulation significantly enhanced global synchrony (median R = 0.68, SD = 0.30), reduced network modularity (median ΔQ = - 0.0017, SD = 2.93), and improved local efficiency (median ΔEff = 0.0158, SD = 0.0038). Individualized stimulation plans consistently outperformed random controls in restoring network-level metrics.
conclusionsThe proposed framework enables data-driven, mathematically interpretable, and simulation-validated planning of personalized brain stimulation strategies for MDD. These findings highlight the potential of EEG-based network analysis and multi-objective optimization in guiding precision neuromodulation interventions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.