MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1973619511 · doi:10.1113/jphysiol.2002.028670

Effects of peripheral sensory input on cortical inhibition in humans

2002· article· en· W1973619511 on OpenAlexafffund
Alexandra Sailer, Gregory F. Molnar, Danny I. Cunic, Robert Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Physiology · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
Canadian institutionsToronto Western HospitalUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
FundersUniversity Health NetworkOntario Innovation Trust
KeywordsTranscranial magnetic stimulationStimulus (psychology)Inhibitory postsynaptic potentialNeuroscienceStimulationPeripheralSensory systemMotor cortexChemistrySilent periodEvoked potentialPsychologyInternal medicineMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cortical inhibitory systems play an important role in motor output. The motor cortex can be inhibited by intracortical mechanisms and by peripheral sensory inputs. We examined whether cortical inhibition from peripheral sensory input is mediated through previously identified intracortical inhibitory systems and how these inhibitory systems interact. Two types of intracortical inhibition were assessed by paired-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). Short-interval intracortical inhibition (SICI) was determined with a subthreshold conditioning stimulus (CS) followed by a test stimulus 2 ms later and long-interval intracortical inhibition (LICI) with suprathreshold conditioning and test stimuli 100 ms apart. Cortical inhibition from peripheral sensory input was induced by median nerve stimulation (MNS) of the right hand and followed by a suprathreshold TMS over the left motor cortex 200 ms later. The first set of experiments tested the effects of different test stimulus intensities on SICI, LICI and cortical inhibition induced by median nerve stimulation (MNSI). With higher test stimulus intensities, LICI and MNSI decreased whereas SICI showed a trend towards an increase. The extent of SICI, LICI and MNSI did not correlate. The second experiment assessed the interaction between MNSI and LICI. The results of applying MNSI and LICI simultaneously were compared with MNSI and LICI alone. MNSI was virtually abolished in the presence of LICI and LICI was also significantly decreased in the presence of MNSI. Thus, the effects of MNSI and LICI when applied together were much less than their expected additive effects when applied alone. The degree of interaction between MNSI and LICI was related to the combined strength of MNSI and LICI but not to the strength of LICI alone. The third experiment investigated the interaction between SICI and MNSI. MNSI and SICI were applied together and the results were compared with MNSI and SICI alone. SICI remained unchanged in the presence of MNSI. We conclude that MNSI is mediated by circuits distinct from those mediating LICI or SICI. The MNSI circuits seem to have an inhibitory interaction with the LICI circuits, whereas the SICI and MNSI circuits do not seem to interact.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.574
Threshold uncertainty score0.176

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.037
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.238 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations103
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of PhysiologySame topicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation StudiesFrench-language works237,207