Effects of prefrontal theta burst stimulation on neuronal activity and subsequent eating behavior: an interleaved rTMS and fNIRS study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (dlPFC) and dorsomedial prefrontal cortex (dmPFC) are both important nodes for self-control and decision-making but through separable processes (cognitive control vs evaluative processing). This study aimed to examine the effects of excitatory brain stimulation [intermittent theta burst stimulation (iTBS)] targeting the dlPFC and dmPFC on eating behavior. iTBS was hypothesized to decrease consumption of appetitive snack foods, via enhanced interference control for dlPFC stimulation and reduced delay discounting (DD) for dmPFC stimulation. Using a single-blinded, between-subjects design, participants (N = 43) were randomly assigned to one of three conditions: (i) iTBS targeting the left dlPFC, (ii) iTBS targeting bilateral dmPFC or (iii) sham. Participants then completed two cognitive tasks (DD and Flanker), followed by a bogus taste test. Functional near-infrared spectroscopy imaging revealed that increases in the medial prefrontal cortex activity were evident in the dmPFC stimulation group during the DD task; likewise, a neural efficiency effect was observed in the dlPFC stimulation group during the Flanker. Gender significantly moderated during the taste test, with females in the dmPFC showing paradoxical increases in food consumption compared to sham. Findings suggest that amplification of evaluative processing may facilitate eating indulgence when preponderant social cues are permissive and food is appetitive.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".