Dose-response relationship between iTBS and prefrontal activation during executive functioning: A fNIRS study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction Intermittent theta-burst stimulation (iTBS) is a non-invasive brain stimulation paradigm that has demonstrated promising therapeutic benefits for a variety of neuropsychiatric disorders. It has recently garnered widespread favor among researchers and clinicians, owing to its comparable potentiation effects as conventional high-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), but administered in a much shorter time frame. However, there is still a lack of agreement over the optimal stimulation intensity, particularly when targeting the prefrontal regions. The objective of this study was to systematically investigate the influence of different stimulation intensities of iTBS, applied over the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC), on brain activity and executive function in healthy adults. Methods Twenty young healthy adults were enrolled in this randomized cross-over experiment. All participants received a single session iTBS over the left DLPFC at intensities of 50, 70, or 100% of their individual resting motor threshold (RMT), each on separate visits. Functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) was used to measure changes of hemoglobin concentrations in prefrontal areas during the verbal fluency task (VFT) before and after stimulation. Results After stimulation, iTBS to the left DLPFC with 70% RMT maintained the concentration change of oxyhemoglobin (HbO) in the target area during the VFT. In contrast, 50% [t(17) = 2.203, P = 0.042, d = 0.523] and 100% iTBS [t(17) = 2.947, P = 0.009, d = 0.547] significantly decreased change of HbO concentration, indicating an inverse U-shape relationship between stimulation intensity and prefrontal hemodynamic response in healthy young adults. Notably, improved VFT performance was only observed after 70% RMT stimulation [t(17) = 2.511, P = 0.022, d = 0.592]. Moreover, a significant positive correlation was observed between task performance and the difference in HbO concentration change in the targeted area after 70% RMT stimulation (r = 0.496, P = 0.036) but not after 50 or 100% RMT stimulation. Conclusion The linear relationship between stimulation intensity and behavioral outcomes reported in previous conventional rTMS studies may not be translated to iTBS. Instead, iTBS at 70% RMT may be more efficacious than 100% RMT.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".