Effects of internal globus pallidus stimulation on motor cortex excitability
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Deep brain stimulation is a promising treatment for PD, but its physiologic effects and mechanisms of action remain poorly understood. Magnetic stimulation studies have revealed abnormalities in several different excitatory and inhibitory circuits in the motor cortex in PD. METHODS: The physiologic effects of internal globus pallidus (GPi) stimulation in seven patients with PD and seven age-matched healthy volunteers were studied. The stimulators were set at the optimal parameters (ON), at half the optimal amplitude (Half-Amp), or switched off (OFF) in random order. Patients were taking their usual medications. Magnetic stimulation was applied to the motor cortex, and motor evoked potentials (MEP) were recorded from the contralateral first dorsal interosseous muscle. Several excitatory and inhibitory pathways that have been found to be abnormal in PD were tested. RESULTS: The motor threshold (MT), MEP recruitment curve (stimulus intensities from 100 to 150% of MT), short and long interval intracortical inhibition, and intracortical facilitation were similar in the three stimulator conditions tested both at rest and during voluntary contraction. The silent period (SP) was longer in the OFF and Half-Amp conditions than in normal control subjects. In the stimulator ON condition, the SP was significantly reduced compared with the OFF condition and became similar to that in normal control subjects. CONCLUSIONS: GPi stimulation while on dopaminergic medications reduced the SP following magnetic stimulation but did not change corticospinal excitability or other measures of intracortical inhibition and facilitation. The reduction of SP may be related to the antidyskinetic and levodopa-blocking effects of ventral GPi stimulation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".