ArticleBrain informatics2025
Personalized rTMS treatment recommendation with retrieval-augmented LLM reasoning.
Article in Brain informatics, 2025. 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is an effective, non-invasive neuromodulation therapy for major depressive disorder (MDD) and treatment-resistant depression (TRD). However, current clinical practice typically relies on standardized protocols that may not adequately account for individual patient variability. To address this gap, we propose a novel, interpretable framework for personalized rTMS treatment recommendations that combines a pretrained sentence embedding model with large language model (LLM)-based reasoning in a retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) setting. Specifically, our approach leverages a pretrained sentence embedding model to encode structured patient profiles into a dense semantic representation, enabling the retrieval of clinically similar cases. These retrieved examples serve as few-shot prompts for in-context learning (ICL), enabling the LLM to reason over these examples and synthesize customized rTMS treatment parameters. Unlike previous approaches that focus solely on individual aspects of personalization, our framework integrates all key parameters (frequency, intensity, and stimulation mode) into a comprehensive recommendation. We systematically evaluated various sentence embedding models and LLMs. Among them, Bge-large-en-v1.5 for few-shot retrieval and GPT-4o-mini for reasoning achieved the highest rTMS protocol matching accuracy of 78.18% using 15 few-shot examples. Our approach is fine-tuning-free, interpretable, and adaptable to real-world, resource-poor clinical settings, providing a promising step forward in data-driven personalized neurostimulation therapy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.