Neuromodulation of the right inferior frontal gyrus in bipolar disorder to target response inhibition: a proof-of-concept study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Bipolar disorder (BD) affects over 1% of the population and is characterized by deficits in response inhibition. Response inhibition, a crucial component of executive functions, involves the ability to suppress or withhold a planned or ongoing response that is no longer required or appropriate in a given context. Response inhibition may be dissociated into three subcomponents: interference inhibition, action withholding, and action cancellation. These subcomponents are assessed using the hybrid response inhibition (HRI) task. Previous research has shown that inhibitory control is strongly lateralized to the right hemisphere. Specifically, the right inferior frontal gyrus (rIFG) is a key node underpinning response inhibition and might be amenable to neuromodulation using repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS). This proof-of-concept study aimed to investigate the effects of rTMS targeting the rIFG on response inhibition in individuals with BD and controls. METHODS: = 12) immediately before and after intermittent theta-burst stimulation (iTBS) and continuous TBS to modulate cortical excitability of the rIFG. RESULTS: The response inhibition subcomponent "action withholding" was significantly improved in the HRI task following iTBS in the BD group. No other significant effects were observed in the results. CONCLUSIONS: Our study is the first to show that iTBS to the rIFG neuromodulated a specific subcomponent of response inhibition in BD. Further research investigating the potential therapeutic effect of neuromodulation of the rIFG in BD is warranted.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".