Changes in electrophysiological markers of cognitive control after administration of galantamine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The healthy brain is able to maintain a stable balance between bottom-up sensory processing and top-down cognitive control. The neurotransmitter acetylcholine plays a substantial role in this. Disruption of this balance could contribute to symptoms occurring in psychosis, including subtle disruption of motor control and aberrant appropriation of salience to external stimuli; however the pathological mechanisms are poorly understood. On account of the role beta oscillations play in mediating cognitive control, investigation of beta oscillations is potentially informative about such mechanisms. Here, we used magnetoencephalography to investigate the effect of the acetylcholinesterase-inhibitor, galantamine, on beta oscillations within the sensorimotor region during both a sensorimotor task and a relevance-modulation task in healthy participants, employing a double blind randomized placebo controlled cross-over design. In the galantamine condition, we found a significant reduction in the post-movement beta rebound in the case of executed movements and also in a planned but not executed movement. In the latter case, the effect was significantly greater following task-relevant compared with irrelevant stimuli. The results suggest that the action of galantamine reduces the influence of top-down cognitive processing relative to bottom-up perceptual processing in a manner resembling changes previously reported in schizophrenia.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".