Skip to main content
. 2024 Nov 11;15:1363984. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2024.1363984

Table 1.

Comparison of the TMS active and sham groups and the general characteristics of the study sample.

Variable Total (n = 34) TMS active (n = 21) TMS sham (n = 13) p
Age 38,4 ± 12.7 39.0 ± 14.6 39.5 ± 9.2 0.941
Sex (female) 17 (50.0%) 6 (46.2%) 11 (52.4%) 0.743
Education level (years of education) 15.7 ± 1.9 15.3 ± 1.7 16.2 ± 2.1 0.150
Disease duration (years) 14.0 ± 9.9 12.6 ± 10.9 16.2 ± 7.9 0.118
Motor threshold (%) 48.0 ± 6.5 49.0 ± 7.0 46.4 ± 5.6 0.320
MADRS T0 27.5 ± 6.6 28.6 ± 7.1 25.8 ± 5.6 0.320
MADRS T1 15.4 ± 10.5 15.0 ± 10.8 15.8 ± 10.5 0.845
MADRS T0–T1 (%) 44.8 ± 34.1 47.9 ± 34.4 39.9 ± 34.3 0.595
MADRS T2 15.1 ± 9.6 13.9 ± 10.9 16.8 ± 7.5 0.429
MADRS T0–T2 (%) 41.0 ± 36.4 45.7 ± 41.6 34.2 ± 27.6 0.521
Coexisting personality disorder (diagnosed personality disorder) 15 (44.1%) 10 (47.6%) 5 (38.5%) 0.621

Data expressed as n (%) or mean (SD).