Thalamo-cortical evoked potentials during stimulation of the dentato-rubro-thalamic tract demonstrate synaptic filtering
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Essential tremor DBS targeting the ventral intermediate nucleus (Vim) of the thalamus and its input, the dentato-rubro-thalamic tract (DRTt), has proven to be an effective treatment strategy. We examined thalamo-cortical evoked potentials (TCEPs) and cortical dynamics during stimulation of the DRTt. We recorded TCEPs in primary motor cortex during clinical and supra-clinical stimulation of the DRTt in ten essential tremor patients. Stimulation was varied over pulse amplitude (2-10 mA) and pulse width (30-250 μs) to allow for strength-duration testing. Testing at clinical levels (3 mA, 60 μs) for stimulation frequencies of 1-160 Hz was performed and phase amplitude coupling (PAC) of beta phase and gamma power was calculated. Primary motor cortex TCEPs displayed two responses: early and all-or-none (<20 ms) or delayed and charge-dependent (>50 ms). Strength-duration curve approximation indicates that the chronaxie of the neural elements related to the TCEPs is <200 μs. At the range of clinical stimulation (amplitude 2-5 mA, pulse width 30-60 μs), TCEPs were not noted over primary motor cortex. Decreased pathophysiological phase-amplitude coupling was seen above 70 Hz stimulation without changes in power spectra and below the threshold of TCEPs. Our findings demonstrate that DRTt stimulation within normal clinical bounds does not excite fibers directly connected with primary motor cortex but that supra-clinical stimulation can excite a direct axonal tract. Both clinical efficacy and phase-amplitude coupling were frequency-dependent, favoring a synaptic filtering model as a possible mechanism of action.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".