MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3217612551 · doi:10.1016/j.brs.2021.10.557

Hemodynamic changes in response to excitatory and inhibitory modulations by transcranial magnetic stimulation at the human sensorimotor cortex

2021· article· en· W3217612551 on OpenAlexaff
Hsin-Ju Lee, Mikko Nyrhinen, Risto J. Ilmoniemi, Fa‐Hsuan Lin

Bibliographic record

VenueBrain stimulation · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTranscranial magnetic stimulationExcitatory postsynaptic potentialInhibitory postsynaptic potentialNeuroscienceStimulationHaemodynamic responseTranscranial alternating current stimulationSensorimotor cortexMedicinePsychologyInternal medicineHeart rateBlood pressure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) can non-invasively induce excitatory or inhibitory neural activity depending on the stimulation parameters. However, the neurophysiological basis for both kinds of modulation remains elusive. Here, with a controlled dosage over the 30-s interval, we elicited excitatory and inhibitory modulations over the human primary motor cortex (M1) with TMS bursts of high (10-Hz and 30-Hz; HF) and low frequency (0.5-Hz; LF), respectively, and took functional magnetic resonance images (fMRI) and electromyography (EMG) recordings simultaneously. We used a customized 8-channel head coil array to integrate with an MRI-compatible TMS coil connected to the stimulator on a 3T MRI scanner. Images were prescribed to cover the left M1. Each TMS-fMRI run consisted of five 30-second “TMS on” and 30-second “TMS off” blocks. One of five types of TMS stimuli was administered in the “TMS-on” block: 0.5-Hz, 10-Hz-3-pulses-per-burst (ppb), 10-Hz-5-ppb, 30-Hz-3-ppb, and 30-Hz-5-ppb. In each TR (2s), images were acquired between 0 and 1 s after the start of each volume acquisition, and TMS pulses were delivered during the MRI silent period. EMG responses were calculated the peak-to-peak amplitudes from the time interval between 20 and 40 ms after the TMS onset. Image pre-processing and General Linear Model were performed using SPM12. Excitatory and inhibitory modulations were evidenced by changes in EMG responses to the HF and LF stimulation, respectively. Significantly increased fMRI signal at M1 was only detected under excitatory HF TMS but not during inhibitory LF TMS. The supplementary motor area (SMA) had significant fMRI signal changes after both TMS. The topology of the activated M1 and SMA matched the activated sensorimotor network during voluntary movement. These findings demonstrated the asymmetric hemodynamic responses to excitatory HF and inhibitory LF TMS modulations with region-dependent relationships between the local fMRI signal changes and TMS dosage over different time scales. Keywords: Transcranial magnetic stimulation, Functional magnetic resonance imaging, Primary motor cortex, Frequency

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.960
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.259 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBrain stimulationSame topicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation StudiesFrench-language works237,207