MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3011568617 · doi:10.1016/j.brs.2020.03.005

Neurovascular coupling during deep brain stimulation

2020· article· en· W3011568617 on OpenAlexafffund
M. Sohail Noor, Linhui Yu, Kartikeya Murari, Zelma H. T. Kiss

Bibliographic record

VenueBrain stimulation · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeurological disorders and treatments
Canadian institutionsHotchkiss Brain InstituteUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaParkinson Society CanadaAlberta Innovates - Health Solutions
KeywordsOrthodromicNeuroscienceFunctional magnetic resonance imagingAntidromicNeocortexStimulationMotor cortexElectrophysiologyDeep brain stimulationChemistryPsychologyMedicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Deep brain stimulation (DBS) is an effective treatment for movement disorders, yet its mechanisms of action remain unclear. One method used to study its circuit-wide neuromodulatory effects is functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) which measures hemodynamics as a proxy of neural activity. To interpret functional imaging data, we must understand the relationship between neural and vascular responses, which has never been studied with the high frequencies used for DBS. OBJECTIVE: To measure neurovascular coupling in the rat motor cortex during thalamic DBS. METHOD: Simultaneous intrinsic optical imaging and extracellular electrophysiology was performed in the motor cortex of urethane-anesthetized rats during thalamic DBS at 7 different frequencies. We related Maximum Change in Reflectance (MCR) from the imaging data to Integrated Evoked Potential (IEP) and change in broadband power of multi-unit (MU) activity, computing Spearman's correlation to determine the strength of these relationships. To determine the source of these effects, we studied the contributions of antidromic versus orthodromic activation in motor cortex perfusion using synaptic blockers. RESULTS: MCR, IEP and change in MU power increased linearly to 60 Hz and saturated at higher frequencies of stimulation. Blocking orthodromic transmission only reduced the DBS-induced change in optical signal by ∼25%, suggesting that activation of corticofugal fibers have a major contribution in thalamic-induced cortical activation. CONCLUSION: DBS-evoked vascular response is related to both evoked field potentials as well as multi-unit activity.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.252
Threshold uncertainty score0.606

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations16
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBrain stimulationSame topicNeurological disorders and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207