A single session of rTMS over the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex influences attentional control in depressed patients
Abstract
Depressed patients are impaired in the ability to shift their focus of attention. This attentional control process is related to dysfunctions in the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC). It has been proposed that a dorsal circuit plays an important role in the interaction between emotional and attentional information processing. However, because the different emphasis of fundamental cognitive neuroscience research and clinical research of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) over the DLPFC, little research has been done on the effects of rTMS on cognitive functioning after a single stimulation session to explore the neural systems underlying depression. This study was conducted as a double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover, within subjects design. Sixteen depressed patients performed a modified task switching paradigm, before and after receiving high frequency (HF) versus placebo rTMS over the left DLPFC. One session of HF-rTMS over the left DLPFC had a specific beneficial effect on task-switching performance, whereas mood remained stable. Antidepressant effects of rTMS could be related to the same neurochemical changes that underlie cognitive functioning. Therefore, task switching performance may provide a unique window into the extent of antidepressant effects which can be considered as second-order long-term effects possibly related to primary alternations in cognitive functioning.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Multiple studies have shown successful sustained attentional enhancements in depressed samples via TMS, rTMS, and tDCS.
“Multiple studies have shown successful sustained attentional enhancements in depressed samples via TMS133, rTMS134, and tDCS135.”
From Paying attention to attention in depression (2019) · cites this paper as [134]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 46 · Cited by 40
- Authors
- Vanderhasselt, M.-A., de Raedt, R., Baeken, C., Leyman, L., & D'haenen, H.
- Affiliations
- Ghent University (BE)
- Vrije Universiteit Brussel (BE)
- Corresponding author
- Vanderhasselt, Marie-anne
- Venue
- The World Journal of Biological Psychiatry
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2009-01
- Volume
- 10
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 34-42
- ISSN
- 1562-2975 (ISSN-L)
- 1814-1412
- OpenAlex
- W2136336487
- Cited by
- 40
- References
- 46
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 1 · 2012: 5
- FWCI
- 0.88
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- The World Journal of Biological Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Ghent University Academic Bibliography (Ghent University) (submittedVersion)
- VUBIR (Vrije Universiteit Brussel) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Treatment of Major Depression
- Keywords
- repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation, dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, depression, attentional control, task switching, high-frequency rTMS, single-session stimulation, cognitive function, antidepressant effects, mood
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Attention, Cognition, Major Depressive Disorder, Depressive Disorder, Major, Double-Blind Method, Emotions, Female, Humans, Functional Laterality, Male, Middle Aged, Neuropsychological Tests, Placebos, Psychomotor Performance, Reaction Time, Task Performance and Analysis, Treatment Outcome, Prefrontal Cortex, Cross-Over Studies, Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review