Brain stimulation over Broca’s area differentially modulates naming skills in neurotypical adults and individuals with Asperger’s syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the present study we tested the hypothesis that, in subjects with Asperger's syndrome (ASP), the dynamics of language-related regions might be abnormal, so that repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) over Broca's area leads to differential behavioral effects as seen in neurotypical controls. We conducted a five-stimulation-site, double-blind, multiple crossover, pseudo-randomized, sham-controlled study in 10 individuals with ASP and 10 age- and gender-matched healthy subjects. Object naming was assessed before and after low-frequency rTMS of the left pars opercularis, left pars triangularis, right pars opercularis and right pars triangularis, and sham stimulation, as guided stereotaxically by each individual's brain magnetic resonance imaging. In ASP participants, naming improved after rTMS of the left pars triangularis as compared with sham stimulation, whereas rTMS of the adjacent left opercularis lengthened naming latency. In healthy subjects, stimulation of parts of Broca's area did not lead to significant changes in naming skills, consistent with published data. Overall, these findings support our hypothesis of abnormal language neural network dynamics in individuals with ASP. From a methodological point of view, this work illustrates the use of rTMS to study the dynamics of brain-behavior relations by revealing the differential behavioral impact of non-invasive brain stimulation in a neuropsychiatric disorder.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".