ArticleFrontiers in computational neuroscience2019
Causally Investigating Cortical Dynamics and Signal Processing by Targeting Natural System Attractors With Precisely Timed (Electrical) Stimulation.
Article in Frontiers in computational neuroscience, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- A randomized study on the effect of a wearable device using 0.75 Hz transcranial electrical stimulation on sleep onset insomnia.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Electrical stimulation is a promising tool for interacting with neuronal dynamics to identify neural mechanisms that underlie cognitive function. Since effects of a single short stimulation pulse typically vary greatly and depend on the current network state, many experimental paradigms have rather resorted to continuous or periodic stimulation in order to establish and maintain a desired effect. However, such an approach explicitly leads to forced and "unnatural" brain activity. Further, continuous stimulation can make it hard to parse the recorded activity and separate neural signal from stimulation artifacts. In this study we propose an alternate strategy: by monitoring a system in realtime, we use the existing preferred states or attractors of the network and apply short and precise pulses in order to switch between those states. When pushed into one of its attractors, one can use the natural tendency of the system to remain in such a state to prolong the effect of a stimulation pulse, opening a larger window of opportunity to observe the consequences on cognitive processing. To elaborate on this idea, we consider flexible information routing in the visual cortex as a prototypical example. When processing a stimulus, neural populations in the visual cortex have been found to engage in synchronized gamma activity. In this context, selective signal routing is achieved by changing the relative phase between oscillatory activity in sending and receiving populations (communication through coherence, CTC). In order to explore how perturbations interact with CTC, we investigate a network of interneuronal gamma (ING) oscillators composed of integrate-and-fire neurons exhibiting similar synchronization and signal routing phenomena. We develop a closed-loop stimulation paradigm based on the phase-response characteristics of the network and demonstrate its ability to establish desired synchronization states. By measuring information content throughout the model, we evaluate the effect of signal contamination caused by the stimulation in relation to the magnitude of the injected pulses and intrinsic noise in the system. Finally, we demonstrate that, up to a critical noise level, precisely timed perturbations can be used to artificially induce the effect of attention by selectively routing visual signals to higher cortical areas.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.