The Nature and Time Course of Cortical Activation Following Subthalamic Stimulation in Parkinson's Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We studied the time course and nature of interactions between the subthalamic nucleus (STN) and the motor cortex in 8 Parkinson disease (PD) patients with chronically implanted STN deep-brain stimulation (DBS) electrodes. We first identified the cortical evoked potentials following STN stimulation. The most consistent potential was positive wave with peak latency of 22.2 +/- 1.2 ms from stimulation of clinically effective contacts. We then stimulated the motor cortex with transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) at 2-15 ms and at the latency of the evoked potential ( approximately 23 ms) following STN DBS. TMS induced currents in 3 directions: lateral-medial (LM) direction activated corticospinal axons directly, posterior-anterior (PA), and anterior-posterior (AP) directions activated corticospinal neurons transynaptically. Motor-evoked potentials (MEP) elicited by AP and PA TMS were facilitated at short (2-4 ms) and medium latencies (21-24 ms). However, MEPs elicited by LM TMS were not modified by STN DBS. Short-latency antidromic stimulation of the corticosubthalamic projections and medium latency transmission likely through the basal ganglia-thalamocortical circuit led to cortical evoked potentials and increased motor cortex excitability at specific intervals following STN stimulation at clinically effective contacts. Cortical activation may be related to the clinical effects of STN DBS in PD.
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".