MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4206311431 · doi:10.1016/j.clinph.2021.12.018

Dose-response of intermittent theta burst stimulation of the prefrontal cortex: A TMS-EEG study

2022· article· en· W4206311431 on OpenAlexafffund
Manon Desforges, Itay Hadas, Brian Mihov, Yan Morin, Mathilde Rochette Braün, Pantelis Lioumis, Reza Zomorrodi, Hugo Théoret, Martín Lepage, Zafiris J. Daskalakis, Sara Tremblay

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Neurophysiology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec en OutaouaisCentre for Addiction and Mental HealthUniversité du Québec à MontréalDouglas Mental Health University InstituteMcGill UniversityRoyal Ottawa Mental Health CentreUniversité de MontréalUniversity of Ottawa
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsTranscranial magnetic stimulationNeurotypicalElectroencephalographyNeuroscienceDorsolateral prefrontal cortexStimulationPsychologyScalpAudiologyPrefrontal cortexMedicineCognitionDevelopmental psychologyAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Using concurrent transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) and electroencephalography (TMS-EEG), this study aims to compare the effect of three intermittent theta-burst stimulation (iTBS) doses on cortical activity in the left dorsolateral prefrontal (DLPFC) cortex. METHODS: Fourteen neurotypical participants took part in the following three experimental conditions: 600, 1200 and 1800 pulses. TMS-EEG recordings were conducted on the left DLPFC pre/post iTBS, including single-pulse TMS and short- and long-interval intracortical inhibition (SICI, LICI). TMS-evoked potentials (TEP) and event-related spectral perturbation (ERSP) were quantified. Linear mixed models were used to assess the effect of iTBS on brain activity. RESULTS: The effects of iTBS on DLPFC activity did not significantly differ between the three doses. Specifically, regardless of dose, iTBS modulated the amplitude of most TEP components (P30, N45, P60, P200), reduced SICI and LICI ratios of P30 and P200, and decreased ERSP power of theta oscillations. CONCLUSIONS: In neurotypical individuals, doubling or tripling the number of iTBS pulses does not result in stronger potentiation of prefrontal activity. However, all iTBS conditions induced significant modulations of DLPFC activity. SIGNIFICANCE: Replicating the study in clinical populations could help define optimal parameters for clinical applications.

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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.976
Threshold uncertainty score0.451

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.085
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations46
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical NeurophysiologySame topicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation StudiesFrench-language works237,207