ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2026
Baseline amyloid burden and global cognitive change during a home-based tDCS protocol in late-life depression: an exploratory single-arm study.
Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Late-life depression often co-occurs with cognitive difficulty, but whether amyloid burden is associated with mood and cognitive change during transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) in older adults is unknown. Methods: In this single-arm pre-post study, 41 older adults were enrolled; 3 withdrew before receiving the device, and 38 received home-based tDCS and completed baseline (V1), post-stimulation (V2), and follow-up (V3) assessments. Depression, insomnia, subjective cognition, MoCA, and a detailed cognitive battery were examined, and 31 change outcomes were regressed on Centiloid and 21 regional amyloid indicators with covariate adjustment. Results: No participant met the ≥50% GDS response criterion, whereas 60.5% showed a ≥2-point MoCA gain; the absent depression response reflects a floor effect expected from the low baseline severity rather than inefficacy. No association survived Benjamini-Hochberg correction across the complete exploratory family. In a biologically motivated Centiloid-only analysis, however, greater Centiloid burden was associated with smaller MoCA gain, and this association survived correction in both the full-analysis and per-protocol sets. Phonemic-fluency findings were less stable, and no comparable FDR-supported association was detected for depression, insomnia, or subjective cognition. Conclusions: The findings do not support a broad amyloid-related cognitive pattern, but they identify a focused, hypothesis-generating Centiloid-MoCA association during the protocol. Because the study was single-arm, neither the observed changes nor the amyloid association can be attributed to stimulation itself. Controlled studies with prespecified outcomes are required.
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.