MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation as an Investigative Tool in the Study of Visual Function

2003· review· en· W2038186616 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Lotfi B. Merabet, Hugo Théoret, and ALVARO PASCUAL-LEONE

Bibliographic record

VenueOptometry and Vision Science · 2003
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Eye InstituteCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchPfizer
KeywordsPhospheneTranscranial magnetic stimulationVisual cortexNeurosciencePsychologyVisual perceptionPerceptionSensationBrain stimulationStimulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is a novel and powerful probe to study the relationship between human brain function and behavior. TMS is being widely used to investigate memory, language, attention, learning, and motor function and is even being utilized therapeutically in the treatment of depression. Some of the earliest applications of TMS have been directed toward the investigation of human visual perception. For example, a strong TMS pulse delivered to the occipital cortex in a sighted or even blind individual can evoke the sensation of perceiving light (visual phosphenes). TMS can also be used to suppress visual perception and investigate the timing of visual information processing. Furthermore, the functional connectivity between different brain areas can be mapped using TMS, thus establishing a causal link between visual cortical function and visual perception. The present article is meant as an overview of the technique of TMS and a review of the literature as it pertains to the study of visual function. The application of TMS in the diagnosis as well as possible therapeutic use in various visual disorders is also discussed.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.476
Teacher spread0.393 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations62
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOptometry and Vision ScienceSame topicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation StudiesFrench-language works237,207