Dependence of subthalamic nucleus oscillations on movement and dopamine in Parkinson’s disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Local field potentials and pairs of neurones in the subthalamic nucleus (STN) of patients with Parkinson's disease show high-frequency oscillations (HFOs) at 15-30 Hz. This study explores how these HFOs are modulated by voluntary movements and by dopaminergic medication. We examined 15 patients undergoing implantation of bilateral deep brain stimulating electrodes using microelectrode recordings of pairs of STN neurones (eight patients) and macroelectrode recordings of local field potentials from the STN (14 patients). Synchronized HFOs between STN neurones were observed in 28 out of 37 pairs in five patients who had tremor in the operating room and none of 45 pairs in three patients who did not. In two of the three non-tremulous patients, HFOs in the frequency spectra of local field potentials were detected but were weaker than in those patients with tremor. Active movement suppressed synchronized HFOs in three out of five pairs of neurones, independent of changes in firing rate. HFOs observed in the local field potentials in nine out of 14 patients were reduced with voluntary movement in six of the eight patients tested. Dopaminergic medication decreased the incidence of synchronized HFOs in STN neurone pairs, reduced HFO synchrony in a pair of tremor cells concurrent with a reduction in firing rate and limb tremor, and decreased HFOs of local field potentials in the STN. These results demonstrate that HFO synchronization in the STN is reduced by voluntary movements and by exogenous dopaminergic medication. A mechanism for neuronal oscillatory synchronization in basal ganglia is proposed. It is suggested that the firing of STN neurones can be synchronized by 15-30 Hz cortical beta oscillatory activity, particularly when dopamine deficiency results in a higher background firing rate of STN neurones, and that this synchronization contributes to parkinsonian pathophysiology.
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) | 0.000 | 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 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".