MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2793203742 · doi:10.1002/ana.25156

Pallidal deep brain stimulation modulates cortical excitability and plasticity

2018· article· en· W2793203742 on OpenAlexaff
Zhen Ni, Sang Jin Kim, Nicolás Phielipp, Soumya Ghosh, Kaviraja Udupa, Carolyn Gunraj, Utpal Saha, Mojgan Hodaie, Suneil K. Kalia, Andrés M. Lozano, Darrin J. Lee, Elena Moro, Alfonso Fasano, Mark Hallett, Anthony E. Lang, Robert Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Neurology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeurological disorders and treatments
Canadian institutionsToronto Western HospitalUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
FundersDystonia Medical Research Foundation
KeywordsNeuroscienceDeep brain stimulationMotor cortexTranscranial magnetic stimulationNeuromodulationStimulationDystoniaNeuroplasticityPrimary motor cortexPsychologyMedicineParkinson's diseaseInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Internal globus pallidus (GPi) deep brain stimulation (DBS) relieves symptoms in dystonia patients. However, the physiological effects produced by GPi DBS are not fully understood. In particular, how a single-pulse GPi DBS changes cortical circuits has never been investigated. We studied the modulation of motor cortical excitability and plasticity with single-pulse GPi DBS in dystonia patients with bilateral implantation of GPi DBS. METHODS: The cortical evoked potentials from DBS were recorded with electroencephalography. Transcranial magnetic stimulation with a conditioning test paired-pulse paradigm was used to investigate the effect of GPi DBS on the primary motor cortex. How GPi DBS might modulate the motor cortical plasticity was tested using a paired associative stimulation paradigm with repetitive pairs of GPi DBS and motor cortical stimulation at specific time intervals. RESULTS: GPi stimulation produced 2 peaks of cortical evoked potentials with latencies of ∼10 and ∼25 milliseconds in the motor cortical area. Cortical facilitation was observed at ∼10 milliseconds after single-pulse GPi DBS, and cortical inhibition was observed after a ∼25-millisecond interval. Repetitive pairs of GPi stimulation with cortical stimulation at these 2 time intervals produced long-term potentiation-like effects in the motor cortex. INTERPRETATION: Single-pulse DBS modulates cortical excitability and plasticity at specific time intervals. These effects may be related to the mechanism of action of DBS. Combination of DBS with cortical stimulation with appropriate timing has therapeutic potential and could be explored in the future as a method to enhance the effects of neuromodulation for neurological and psychiatric diseases. Ann Neurol 2018;83:352-362.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.062
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations71
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of NeurologySame topicNeurological disorders and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207