Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30319337›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in neuroscience2018

A Method for Simultaneous Evaluation of Muscular and Neural Prepulse Inhibition.

Rodrigo San-Martin, Maria Inês Zimiani, Claudemiro Noya, Milton Augusto Vendramini Ávila, Rosana Shuhama, Cristina Marta Del-Ben, Paulo Rossi Menezes, Francisco José Fraga, Cristiane Salum

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 40% of its field
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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. 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

9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Rodrigo San-MartinCenter for Mathematics, Computation and Cognition, Universidade Federal do ABC, São Bernardo do Campo, Brazil.
Maria Inês ZimianiCenter for Mathematics, Computation and Cognition, Universidade Federal do ABC, São Bernardo do Campo, Brazil.
Claudemiro NoyaEngineering, Modeling and Applied Social Sciences Center, Universidade Federal do ABC, Santo André, Brazil.
Milton Augusto Vendramini ÁvilaRibeirão Preto Medical School, Universidade de São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, Brazil.
Rosana ShuhamaRibeirão Preto Medical School, Universidade de São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, Brazil.
Cristina Marta Del-BenRibeirão Preto Medical School, Universidade de São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, Brazil.
Paulo Rossi MenezesDepartment of Preventive Medicine, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
Francisco José FragaEngineering, Modeling and Applied Social Sciences Center, Universidade Federal do ABC, Santo André, Brazil.
Cristiane SalumCenter for Mathematics, Computation and Cognition, Universidade Federal do ABC, São Bernardo do Campo, Brazil.
Universidade Federal do ABC · BRUniversidade de Ribeirão Preto · BRUniversidade de São Paulo · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Prepulse inhibition (PPI) test has been widely used to evaluate sensorimotor gating. In humans, deficits in this mechanism are measured through the orbicularis muscle response using electromyography (EMG). Although this mechanism can be modulated by several brain structures and is impaired in some pathologies as schizophrenia and bipolar disorder, neural PPI evaluation is rarely performed in humans. Since eye blinks are a consequence of PPI stimulation, they strongly contaminate the electroencephalogram (EEG) signal. This paper describes a method to reduce muscular artifacts and enable neural PPI assessment through EEG in parallel to muscular PPI evaluation using EMG. Both types of signal were simultaneously recorded in 22 healthy subjects. PPI was evaluated by the acoustical startle response with EMG and by the P2-N1 event-related potential (ERP) using EEG in Fz, Cz, and Pz electrodes. In order to remove EEG artifacts, Independent Component Analysis (ICA) was performed using two methods. Firstly, visual inspection discarded components containing artifact characteristics as ocular and tonic muscle artifacts. The second method used visual inspection as gold standard to validate parameters in an automated component selection using the SASICA algorithm. As an outcome, EEG artifacts were effectively removed and equivalent neural PPI evaluation performance was obtained using both methods, with subjects exhibiting consistent neural as well as muscular PPI. This novel method improves PPI test, enabling neural gating mechanisms assessment within the latency of 100-200 ms, which is not evaluated by other sensory gating tests as P50 and mismatch negativity.

Indexed as

electroencephalogram (EEG)event-related potentials (ERP)fully automated artifact removalindependent component analysis (ICA)prepulse inhibition (PPI)sensorimotor gatingsensory gating

Identifiers

PMID30319337
PMCPMC6168667
OpenAlexW2892598975

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.