ClinicalTrials.gg
RecruitingNCT05923645Updated Jun 28, 2023

Efficacy of rTMS as an Adjunct to AI Enabled Remedial Intervention in Children With Dyslexia

An interventional study of Transcranial magnetic stimulation (Hf rTMS) in Dyslexia, Specific Learning Disability and Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation, sponsored by All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi. Recruiting at 1 site in India. Open to participants aged 6 Years to 18 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2023-06-28.

Sponsored by All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment

From the registry’s dates

  • Primary completion was expected by Dec 2025, 10 months ago, but the record still lists the study as recruiting.
  • Started Jan 2023; still recruiting 3 years 10 months later.
Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
60
Allocation
Not applicable
Ages
6 Years to 18 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

Dyslexia is the most common neurobehavioral disorder affecting children, with prevalence rates ranging from 17.5% to 21%. Studies have shown incomplete response to remediation and behavioural therapies in children with dyslexia. Evidence from neuroimaging studies as well as neuromodulation studies supporting a neurobiological basis of dyslexia is extensive according to which under-activation and poor connectivity in the underlying pathways for language and reading is the primary pathophysiology underlying reading difficulties. Evidence from studies on neuromodulation have shown that by combining remedial intervention with neuromodulation there is a synergistic effect through the mechanism of long term potentiation. In view of the above mentioned our study aims to investigate the role of Hf rTMS as an adjunct to AI enabled remedial intervention in children with dyslexia in improving their reading abilities.

Read the detailed description
  • Consecutive School going children fulfilling DSM V criteria for SLD with dyslexia will be screened in the study centre for eligibility.
  • After applying inclusion and exclusion criteria, legal guardians of the participants will be counselled and written informed consent will be taken.
  • Baseline data of the participants will be collected.
  • GLAD (Grade level Assessment Device Tool ), CTOPP-2 (Comprehensive Test Of Phonological Processing Tool, 2nd edition), WRAT-5 (Wide Range achievement test, 5th edition ) will be administered on the participants at baseline.
  • fMRI at baseline will be done for 10 sequential participants whose legal guardians are willing to give consent for the same.
  • Intervention Study group will be subjected to 6 weeks of AI enabled remedial education with Hf-rTMS (high frequency - repetitive Transcranial Magnetic stimulation) as per protocol developed based on previous studies of rTMS in SLD and from experience from other studies using rTMS for other indications.
  • Participant will be started on AI enabled remediation therapy as described below and after ensuring 1st session of remediation the participant will be called for the rTMS session as detailed below.

AI enabled remedial intervention -

  • It will be administered via a Web application based phonological training program (web application address : http://readable.com). This program was Developed at AIIMS, New Delhi (Dept of Pediatrics, Child Neurology division) in collaboration with Delhi IIT, as part of preliminary work done under Dyslexia program under Child Neurology, AIIMS by Dr Sachendra Badal in 2019 (Chief guide ; Professor Sheffali Gulati). This was further adapted to enhance learning by AI technique as part of research work by Dr Sayoni Roy Chowdhary in 2021 (Chief guide; Professor Sheffali Gulati).
  • It is a cloud-based application design, which uses a bottom-up strategic learning approach. It was developed for Indian context based on Components of effective remedial program as recommended internationally. It is based on the principle of reinforcement learning with primary focus on phonic awareness, phonics and sight word recognition.
  • Structure and Duration - It consists of introductory teaching session which would be administered by the primary investigator for teaching 8 modules over 5 classes (32 hours each) over 1st 10 days using online platform. This would be followed by AI based structured remediation under parental supervision for 1 hr/day, 7 days/week for total 6 weeks . A total of 8 modules would be taught through the AI enabled program.
  • Follow up would be done at set intervals after intensive training for 10 days: weekly for two weeks and subsequently fortnightly for rest of duration to ensure proper use of intervention by the primary investigator using telephonic calls to check for compliance. Total number of online sessions, total count of attempted words and total count of correctly pronounced words would be monitored by the web application. Compliance will be defined by (total 52 hours of intervention) Good: > 80% i.e. > 42 hours of intervention; Average: 60-80% i.e. 31-42 hours of intervention; Poor: \<60% i.e. \< 31 hours of intervention.

rTMS procedure

  • Handedness will be determined via Edinburgh handedness inventory - Laterality Index
  • Electromyography will be recorded with surface electrodes from the right Abductor pollicis brevis (APB) using a belly tendon montage on the dominant hand
  • A figure of eight TMS coil connected to stimulator coil will be placed over the contralateral motor cortex tangentially to the scalp with the handle pointing backward. The motor hot-spot will determined as the location on the scalp where TMS produced the largest MEP from the APB at rest
  • Obtaining Motor Cortex Threshold- Lowest stimulator output over the motor hot-spot that could elicit EMG response in APB in 5 out of 10 trials
  • Prior to start of each cycle, on day 1 cortical excitability parameters will be recorded using standard protocols for RMT (Resting Motor Threshold), MEP (Motor Evoked Potential), LICI (Long interval intracortical inhibition) and SICI (Short interval intracortical inhibition).
  • Site of rTMS - established using 10-20 EEG system at Left IPL (inferior parietal lobule , corresponding to angular and supramarginal gyrus), and left STG (superior temporal gyrus) at P3 and P5 respectively,
  • TMS Protocol used for each session - 5 Hz High frequency rTMS, at 100% RMT, 60 pulses per train, total 10 trains , gap between 2 consecutive trains of 30 sec
  • Duration - Total 3 cycles per participant will be administered.1st cycle of 10 sessions over 10 consecutive days. 2nd cycle of 5 sessions over 5 consecutive days. 3rd cycle for 5 sessions over 5 consecutive days. Gap of 6 weeks between 2 consecutive cycles.
  • Participants will be monitored for adverse events during and after the study period. Appropriate measures such as immediate supine placement upon symptoms or signs of hypotension, intranasal midazolam in case or seizures will be taken.

Follow up

  • Collection of data at 6 weeks - Cortical excitability parameters, GLAD, CTOPP-2, WRAT-5 scores and CGI-C (Clinical Global Impression of Change) for both teacher and parents.
  • Collection of data at 12 weeks - Cortical excitability parameters, GLAD, CTOPP-2, WRAT-5 scores and CGI-C for both teacher and parents.
  • At 12 weeks (±7 days) fMRI will be repeated for those 10 sequential participants whose legal guardians had given consent for the same.
  • Follow up after 3 months post intervention - 24 weeks - Reassessment of the participant with GLAD, CTOPP-2 and WRAT-5 tests, Cortical excitability parameters and CGI- for parents and teachers.
  • Participants will be assessed telephonically every week for compliance with remediation therapy and any adverse effects of rTMS and will also be instructed to report any adverse event as and when they occur.

Control - For controls investigators will be using the retrospective data of children with dyslexia who received AI enabled remedial intervention alone (for 6 weeks) as a part of a previous study by Dr Sayoni under the guidance of Prof Sheffali Gulati as Chief guide.

•Assessment Tools

  1. GLAD (Grade level Assessment Device Tool): Assesses the level of academic performance in children up to VI standard , developed at National Institute of Mental Health, Secunderabad and has been validated in Indian population. Format I contains Test booklets of class I to class IV worksheets in English, Hindi \& Mathematics and Tasks are verbal/ gestural and written responses to questions. Number of item varies in each section and also in each class level, which is scored and converted to a percentage. Format II is to be used by the clinician for noting observations while the child is performing on format I and has three sections and a summary sheet. There are three broad categories: Independent (score >70%), Instructional (score 40-70%) and Frustrational level (score \<40%).
  2. CTOPP-2 (Comprehensive Test Of Phonological Processing Tool, 2nd edition): The Comprehensive Test of Phonological Processing (CTOPP) was published in 1999 and revised in 2013 to meet the need for an assessment of reading-related phonological processing skills. The CTOPP-2 has four principal uses: to identify individuals who are significantly below their peers in important phonological abilities, to determine strengths and weaknesses among developed phonological processes, to document individuals' progress in phonological processing as a consequence of special intervention programs, and to serve as a measurement device in research studies investigating phonological processing. It is individually administered to children between 4 years to 24 years 11 months with a total testing time of 40 minutes. CTOPP2 measures phonological abilities in four domains; as composite scores of phonological awareness, alternate phonological awareness, phonological memory and rapid symbolic/ non-symbolic naming through core and supplemental subsets (elision, blending words, phoneme isolation, blending nonwords, segmenting nonwords, memory for digits, nonword repetition, rapid digit naming, rapid letter naming, rapid color naming, rapid object naming). Composite scores of CTOPP2: Phonological Awareness Composite Score (PACS) comprises the standard scores of three subtests-Elision, Blending Words, and Sound Matching-for 4 through 6 year olds, and Elision, Blending Words, and Phoneme Isolation for 7 through 24 year olds. The PACS represents the examinee's awareness of and access to the phonological structure of oral language. Phonological Memory Composite Score (PMCS) comprises the standard scores of two subtests: Memory for Digits and Nonword Repetition for all individuals. The PMCS represents the examinee's ability to code information phonologically for temporary storage in working or short-term memory. The Rapid Symbolic Naming Composite Score (RSNCS) comprises the standard scores of two subtests: Rapid Digit Naming and Rapid Letter Naming for all individuals. The RSNCS measures the examinee's ability to include efficient retrieval of phonological information from long-term or permanent memory and execute a sequence of operations quickly and repeatedly. Rapid Non-Symbolic Naming Composite Score (RNNCS) comprises the standard scores of two subtests-Rapid Color Naming and Rapid Object Naming and offers an alternative for young children, ages 4 through 6 year olds, not familiar with letters and numbers. The RNNCS measures the examinee's ability to include efficient retrieval of phonological information from long-term or permanent memory and executing a sequence of operations quickly and repeatedly using objects and colors. The Alternate Phonological Awareness Composite Score (APACS), an alternate composite for measuring phonological awareness is available for 7 through 24 year olds. Combining the scaled scores from Blending Nonwords and Segmenting Nonwords forms it. The APACS measures the examinee's phonological awareness exclusively with nonwords. The CTOPP-2 yields six types of normative scores: age equivalents, grade equivalents, percentile ranks, subtest scaled scores, composite indexes, and developmental scores.
  3. WRAT-5 (Wide Range achievement test, 5th edition): It is a tool applied for children more than 5 years of age. The subsets include Word reading, Sentence comprehension, Spelling, Math computation and Reading composite. It is available in Indian version (WRAT-5 India blue form) and validated for Indian population (aged 6 years to 19 years, 11 months) since 2019.
02

Conditions studied

  • Dyslexia
  • Specific Learning Disability
  • Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation

Browse trials for

Keywords

  • Dyslexia
  • SLD
  • TMS
  • Hf rTMS
03

In context

Dyslexia

127 studies on the registry are indexed under Dyslexia; 27 are open to participants now.

This study's planned enrollment of 60 is below the median of 71 across 106 interventional studies indexed under Dyslexia.

Browse Dyslexia studies →

Lead sponsor

All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi is the lead sponsor of 143 studies on the registry; 13 are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
6 Years to 18 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

  • Indian school going children aged 6-18 years having specific learning disorder (SLD) with dyslexia diagnosed by criteria
  • English as one of the languages in school
  • Parents willing for the study

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Parents not willing to participate or follow up at desired frequency of study
  • Child who has already received or is on remedial intervention within last 12 weeks provided by Child Psychologist/ Clinician/Psychiatrist
  • Children who participated in a completed DM dissertation on remedial program in SLD
  • Child already on any psychotropic medications
  • Neurological or psychiatric disorder other than comorbid disorders of SLD
  • Uncontrolled epilepsy as defined by seizure frequency >1/month for preceding 3 months
  • Severe concurrent illness or disease or unstable medical conditions
  • Any for MRI like presence of pacemaker, metallic implant
  • Any contraindications for TMS like Implanted electronic device and non-removable metallic objects near coil e.g. pacemaker, cochlear implant; presence of ferromagnetic metal in the head outside the mouth; on medication lowering seizure threshold.
Terms in these criteria, in plain language(2)

Underlined terms in the criteria open these too. Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.

DSM diagnostic criteria

The American Psychiatric Association’s manual of mental health diagnoses. DSM-5 (2013, revised as DSM-5-TR in 2022) replaced DSM-IV, and some studies still name the older edition. “Meets DSM criteria for …” means diagnosed by that edition’s diagnostic criteria, usually by a clinician in an interview.

Contraindication

A reason a treatment, test or procedure should not be given to a particular person, such as an allergy, another illness or a medicine they take.

05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Not applicable
Intervention model
Single group
Masking
None (open label)
Enrollment
60 participants (estimated)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    High frequency repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation

    Children who have given consent for the study and are fulfilling the inclusion and exclusion criteria will be enrolled and given Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) as per protocol as described below over 12 week along with AI based remedial intervention. TMS protocol - 5 Hz High frequency rTMS, at 100% RMT, 60 pulses per train, total 10 trains , gap between 2 consecutive trains of 30 sec, at left IPL and left STG localised using 10-20 EEG based system at P3 and P5 respectively , using figure of 8 coil 1st cycle of 10 sessions over 10 consecutive days, 2nd cycle of 5 sessions over 5 consecutive days , 3rd cycle for 5 sessions over 5 consecutive days ; gap of 6 weeks between 2 consecutive cycles Total 3 cycles per patient

    Device: Transcranial magnetic stimulation (Hf rTMS)

Interventions

  • DeviceTranscranial magnetic stimulation (Hf rTMS)

    TMS protocol - 5 Hz High frequency rTMS, at 100% RMT, 60 pulses per train, total 10 trains , gap between 2 consecutive trains of 30 sec, at left IPL and left STG localised using 10-20 EEG based system at P3 and P5 respectively , using figure of 8 coil 1st cycle of 10 sessions over 10 consecutive days, 2nd cycle of 5 sessions over 5 consecutive days , 3rd cycle for 5 sessions over 5 consecutive days ; gap of 6 weeks between 2 consecutive cycles Total 3 cycles per patient

    Also known as: AI based remedial intervention

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Improvement in reading abilities of the participants as assessed by CTOPP-2 scores at 6 and 12 weeks from baseline.

    Difference in mean of CTOPP-2 scores at 6 and 12 weeks from baseline. CTOPP-2 - Comprehensive Test Of Phonological Processing Tool, 2nd edition -tool has been explained in the study description section above.

    Time frame: From baseline to 6 and 12 weeks

  2. Improvement in reading abilities of the participants as assessed by GLAD scores at 6 and 12 weeks from baseline.

    Difference in mean of GLAD scores at 6 and 12 weeks from baseline. GLAD - Grade level Assessment Device Tool The tool has been explained in the study description section above.

    Time frame: From baseline to 6 and 12 weeks

  3. Improvement in reading abilities of the participants as assessed by WRAT-5 scores at 6 and 12 weeks from baseline.

    Difference in mean of WRAT5 scores at 6 and 12 weeks from baseline. WRAT-5 - Wide Range achievement test, 5th edition The tool has been explained in the study description section above.

    Time frame: From baseline to 6 and 12 weeks

  4. Improvement in reading abilities of the intervention group (who received Hf-rTMS with AI based remedial intervention) as assessed by CTOPP-2 scores at 6 weeks as compared to controls (who received only AI based remedial intervention).

    Difference in mean of change in CTOPP-2 scores at 6 weeks between the intervention group and the retrospective data of controls CTOPP-2 - Comprehensive Test Of Phonological Processing Tool, 2nd edition The tool has been explained in the study description section above.

    Time frame: From baseline to 6 weeks

  5. Improvement in reading abilities of the intervention group (who received Hf-rTMS with AI based remedial intervention) as assessed by GLAD scores at 6 weeks as compared to controls (who received only AI based remedial intervention).

    Difference in mean of change in GLAD scores at 6 weeks between the intervention group and the retrospective data of controls GLAD - Grade level Assessment Device Tool The tool has been explained in the study description section above.

    Time frame: From baseline to 6 weeks

  6. Improvement in reading abilities of the intervention group (who received Hf-rTMS with AI based remedial intervention) as assessed by WRAT5 scores at 6 weeks as compared to controls (who received only AI based remedial intervention).

    Difference in mean of change in WRAT5 scores at 6 weeks between the intervention group and the retrospective data of controls WRAT-5 - Wide Range achievement test, 5th edition The tool has been explained in the study description section above.

    Time frame: From baseline to 6 weeks

Secondary outcomes

  1. To compare the domain wise change CTOPP-2 scores of participants pre and post intervention

    Difference in mean of Domain wise CTOPP2 score at 6 and 12 weeks from baseline CTOPP-2 - Comprehensive Test Of Phonological Processing Tool, 2nd edition - details of the tools have been described in the study description section above.

    Time frame: From baseline to 6 and 12 weeks

  2. To compare the domain wise change WRAT-5 scores of participants pre and post intervention

    Difference in mean of Domain wise WRAT-5 score at 6 and 12 weeks from baseline WRAT-5 - Wide Range achievement test, 5th edition - details of the tools have been described in the study description section above

    Time frame: From baseline to 6 and 12 weeks

  3. To evaluate the persistence of effect of Hf rTMS in children with dyslexia at 24 weeks as assessed by WRAT5 scores

    Difference in mean of WRAT-5 scores at 24 weeks from 12 weeks and from baseline WRAT-5 - Wide Range achievement test, 5th edition The tool has been explained in the study description section above.

    Time frame: From baseline to 24 weeks from 12 weeks and

  4. To evaluate the persistence of effect of Hf rTMS in children with dyslexia at 24 weeks as assessed by GLAD scores

    Difference in mean of GLAD scores at 24 weeks from 12 weeks and from baseline GLAD - Grade level Assessment Device Tool The tool has been explained in the study description section above.

    Time frame: From baseline to 24 weeks from 12 weeks and

  5. To evaluate the persistence of effect of Hf rTMS in children with dyslexia at 24 weeks as assessed by CTOPP-2 scores

    Difference in mean of CTOPP-2 scores at 24 weeks from 12 weeks and from baseline CTOPP-2 - Comprehensive Test Of Phonological Processing Tool, 2nd edition The tool has been explained in the study description section above.

    Time frame: From baseline to 24 weeks from 12 weeks and

  6. To evaluate the cortical excitability parameter - RMT pre and post intervention

    Mean change in RMT from baseline at 6 weeks, 12 weeks and 24 weeks into the study RMT - Resting Motor Threshold

    Time frame: at 6 weeks, 12 weeks and 24 weeks into the study

  7. To evaluate the resting state functional networks and brain activation profile during phonological tasks using functional MRI in dyslexic children pre and post intervention

    Differences in functional connectivity and Difference in activation scores of ROI (region of Interest) during the phonological tasks on f MRI from baseline at 12 weeks (at end of intervention)

    Time frame: from baseline at 12 weeks (at end of intervention)

  8. To describe adverse events noted during Hf rTMS

    AE= Positive increase in any of the ROS (review of systems) criteria compared to pre therapy No of patients who have had atleast 1 AE AE rate: ratio of sessions with adverse events divided by total sessions

    Time frame: 12 weeks

  9. To describe subjective improvement as assessed by parents and teachers of children with dyslexia

    Subjective Improvement as assessed by the parent and teacher on a 7 point Likert scale

    Time frame: at 6 weeks, 12 weeks and 24 weeks from baseline

07

Study locations

1 of 1 sites recruiting
08

References and documents

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

No publications or documents are linked to this record.

09

Timeline

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
ElapsedEstimatedEstimated, not yet reachedSimilar studies: half by the dot; the band is the middle halfHalf of similar studies reached it by the dot; the band is the middle half, from a quarter to three quarters

Started Jan 2023 (actual). Primary completion is estimated for Dec 2025, 35 months after the start.

Of 62 non-industry interventional studies with no phase under Dyslexia, half reached primary completion within 24 months of starting (the median), counting those still running; a quarter within 10 and three quarters within 57. This study's planned 35 months is above that.

Counting every sponsor, half of 69 studies reached it within 24 months; a quarter within 9 and three quarters within 57.

How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.

Registered
Jan 28, 2023
First posted
Jun 28, 2023
StartActual
Jan 1, 2023
Primary completionEst.
Dec 31, 2025
CompletionEst.
Dec 31, 2025
Last update
Jun 28, 2023
What these dates mean
Start.
When the first participant enrolled; while estimated, when the study expects to open to recruitment.
Primary completion.
When the last participant was examined or treated to collect data for the study's main question, its primary outcome. A study that stopped early gives the date its data collection stopped.
Completion.
When the last participant's last visit took place, for every outcome, secondary ones and side effects included: the end of the study. Often later than primary completion, sometimes the same day.
Actual and Est.
Actual means the registry says the date has happened. Est. (estimated) is a date the sponsor plans or expects. It can still move, and the sponsor is expected to change it to actual once it has passed.
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Jun 28, 2023, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT05923645
Responsible party
Sheffali Gulati (Professor, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi) — Principal investigator
First posted
Jun 28, 2023
Start date
Jan 1, 2023
Primary completion
Dec 31, 2025 (estimated)
Completion
Dec 31, 2025 (estimated)
Last update
Jun 28, 2023

Study contacts

Sheffali Gulati
Contact
sheffaligulati@gmail.com
01126594679
Sheffali Gulati
Contact
sheffaligulati1@gmail.com
9810386847
Sheffali Gulati
principal investigator · All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delh

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
Yes
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Interested in this study?

Eligibility is decided by the study team. Share this record with your doctor or contact the team directly.

Contact study team

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion