Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30211694›Full record

ArticleJournal of neural engineering2018

A neural mass model to predict electrical stimulation evoked responses in human and non-human primate brain.

Ishita Basu, Britni Crocker, Kara Farnes, Madeline M Robertson, Angelique C Paulk, Deborah I Vallejo, Darin D Dougherty, Sydney S Cash, Emad N Eskandar, Mark M Kramer and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of neural engineering, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Deterministic, stochastic, and mean-field PDE models in neuroscience.Frontiers in computational neuroscience · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Journal of neural engineering · 2023
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Ishita BasuDepartment of Neurosurgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, United States of America. Department of Psychiatry, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, United States of America.
Britni Crocker
Kara Farnes
Madeline M Robertson
Angelique C Paulk
Deborah I Vallejo
Darin D Dougherty
Sydney S Cash
Emad N Eskandar
Mark M Kramer
Alik S Widge

Funding

Seizure focus delineation using spontaneous and stimulus evoked EEG featuresK24NS088568 · NINDS · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI CASH, SYDNEY S · 2015 to 2019
$923k
Synchronizing a Fear Regulation Circuit By Temporally Patterned Closed-LoopNeurostimulationR21MH109722 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA · PI WIDGE, ALIK S. · 2016 to 2017
$444k
Computational Modeling of Deep Brain Stimulation of the Ventral StriatumR03MH111320 · NIMH · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI DOUGHERTY, DARIN D, WIDGE, ALIK S. · 2016 to 2016
$183k
NIMH NIH HHS R03 MH111320NIMH NIH HHS R21 MH109722NINDS NIH HHS K24 NS088568
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveDeep brain stimulation (DBS) is a valuable tool for ameliorating drug resistant pathologies such as movement disorders and epilepsy. DBS is also being considered for complex neuro-psychiatric disorders, which are characterized by high variability in symptoms and slow responses that hinder DBS setting optimization. The objective of this work was to develop an in silico platform to examine the effects of electrical stimulation in regions neighboring a stimulated brain region. APPROACH: We used the Jansen-Rit neural mass model of single and coupled nodes to simulate the response to a train of electrical current pulses at different frequencies (10-160 Hz) of the local field potential recorded in the amygdala and cortical structures in human subjects and a non-human primate.

resultsWe found that using a single node model, the evoked responses could be accurately modeled following a narrow range of stimulation frequencies. Including a second coupled node increased the range of stimulation frequencies whose evoked responses could be efficiently modeled. Furthermore, in a chronic recording from a non-human primate, features of the in vivo evoked response remained consistent for several weeks, suggesting that model re-parameterization for chronic stimulation protocols would be infrequent. SIGNIFICANCE: Using a model of neural population activity, we reproduced the evoked response to cortical and subcortical stimulation in human and non-human primate. This modeling framework provides an environment to explore, safely and rapidly, a wide range of stimulation settings not possible in human brain stimulation studies. The model can be trained on a limited dataset of stimulation responses to develop an optimal stimulation strategy for an individual patient.

Indexed as

Deep Brain StimulationModels, NeurologicalAlgorithmsAmygdalaAnimalsCerebral CortexComputer SimulationEvoked PotentialsHumansMalePrimatesReproducibility of Results

Identifiers

PMID30211694
PMCPMC6757338

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.