MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3007512289 · doi:10.1101/2020.02.19.956466

Evidence for immediate enhancement of hippocampal memory encoding by network-targeted theta-burst stimulation during concurrent fMRI

2020· preprint· en· W3007512289 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
Canadian institutionsScience North
FundersNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeNational Institute of Mental HealthNational Institutes of HealthNorthwestern University
KeywordsHippocampal formationHippocampusEpisodic memoryStimulationTranscranial magnetic stimulationBrain stimulationEncoding (memory)NeuroplasticityTranscranial direct-current stimulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The hippocampus supports episodic memory via interaction with a distributed brain network. Previous experiments using network-targeted noninvasive brain stimulation have identified episodic memory enhancements and modulation of activity within the hippocampal network. However, mechanistic insights were limited because these effects were measured long after stimulation and therefore could have reflected various neuroplastic aftereffects with extended timecourses. In this experiment with human subjects of both sexes, we tested for immediate stimulation impact on encoding-related activity of the hippocampus and immediately adjacent medial-temporal cortex by delivering theta-burst transcranial magnetic stimulation (TBS) concurrent with fMRI, as an immediate impact of stimulation would suggest an influence on neural activity. We reasoned that TBS would be particularly effective for influencing the hippocampus because rhythmic neural activity in the theta band is associated with hippocampal memory processing. First, we demonstrated that it is possible to obtain robust fMRI correlates of task-related activity during concurrent TBS. We then identified immediate effects of TBS on encoding of visual scenes. Brief volleys of TBS targeting the hippocampal network increased activity of the targeted (left) hippocampus during scene encoding and increased subsequent recollection. Stimulation did not influence activity during an intermixed numerical task with no memory demand. Control conditions using beta-band and out-of-network stimulation also did not influence hippocampal activity or recollection. TBS targeting the hippocampal network therefore immediately impacted hippocampal memory processing. This suggests direct, beneficial influence of stimulation on hippocampal neural activity related to memory and supports the role of theta-band activity in human episodic memory. Significance Statement Can noninvasive stimulation directly impact function of indirect, deep-brain targets such as the hippocampus? We tested this by targeting an accessible region of the hippocampal network via transcranial magnetic stimulation during concurrent fMRI. We reasoned that theta-burst stimulation would be particularly effective for impacting hippocampal function, as this stimulation rhythm should resonate with the endogenous theta-nested-gamma activity prominent in hippocampus. Indeed, theta-burst stimulation targeting the hippocampal network immediately impacted hippocampal activity during encoding, improving memory formation as indicated by enhanced later recollection. Rhythm- and location-control stimulation conditions had no such effects. These findings suggest a direct influence of noninvasive stimulation on hippocampal neural activity and highlight that the theta-burst rhythm is relatively privileged in its ability to influence hippocampal memory function.

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 score0.004

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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.217 · 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

Citations5
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)→Same topicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies→French-language works237,207→