MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405197639 · doi:10.1016/j.transm.2024.100069

A NEW ANGLE ON TRANSCRANIAL MAGNETIC STIMULATION COIL ORIENTATION: A TARGETED NARRATIVE REVIEW

2024· article· en· W4405197639 on OpenAlexaff
Andris Cerins, Elizabeth Thomas, Tracy Barbour, Joseph J. Taylor, Shan Siddiqi, Nicholas T. Trapp, Alexander McGirr, Kevin A. Caulfield, Joshua C. Brown, Leo Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueTranscranial magnetic stimulation . · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTranscranial magnetic stimulationOrientation (vector space)Electromagnetic coilNarrativePsychologyStimulationNuclear magnetic resonanceNeurosciencePhysicsEngineeringElectrical engineeringArtLiteratureGeometryMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

activity), and 4) GABAA agonist, lorazepam (2.5mg).Corticomotor excitability was measured with motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) before and after rTMS.TMS was delivered to the left motor cortex at 80% of resting motor threshold.Both 10-Hz and iTBS otherwise aligned with FDA-cleared protocols.Statistical comparisons were conducted with repeated measures ANOVA.Results: For 10-Hz, d-cycloserine enhanced MEPs relative to placebo (Z=-3.74,p=.001) which was abolished when dextromethorphan was added (Z=-.391, p=.695), while Lorazepam decreased MEPs [Z=-6.06,p<.001].iTBS was also enhanced by dcycloserine (Z=-5.13,p<.001), but unlike 10-Hz, this effect persisted with dextromethorphan (Z=-5.30,p<.001) and there was no reduction by lorazepam (Z=-.447,p=.654).Conclusions: Our preliminary results suggest that 10-Hz rTMS works through LTP alone, while iTBS appears to reduce GABA receptor expression as well.This study is the first to investigate the synaptic-level mechanisms of 1) the 3000 pulse 10-Hz protocol, 2) the effects of NMDA and GABA receptor modulation, 3) iTBS and 10-Hz protocols.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.503
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.001

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.276 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTranscranial magnetic stimulation .Same topicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation StudiesFrench-language works237,207