Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31798436›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in computational neuroscience2019

Optimal Stimulation Protocol in a Bistable Synaptic Consolidation Model.

Chiara Gastaldi, Samuel Muscinelli, Wulfram Gerstner

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

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 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 39% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Chiara GastaldiSchool of Computer and Communication Sciences and School of Life Sciences, École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Samuel MuscinelliSchool of Computer and Communication Sciences and School of Life Sciences, École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Wulfram GerstnerSchool of Computer and Communication Sciences and School of Life Sciences, École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Synaptic changes induced by neural activity need to be consolidated to maintain memory over a timescale of hours. In experiments, synaptic consolidation can be induced by repeating a stimulation protocol several times and the effectiveness of consolidation depends crucially on the repetition frequency of the stimulations. We address the question: is there an understandable reason why induction protocols with repetitions at some frequency work better than sustained protocols-even though the accumulated stimulation strength might be exactly the same in both cases? In real synapses, plasticity occurs on multiple time scales from seconds (induction), to several minutes (early phase of long-term potentiation) to hours and days (late phase of synaptic consolidation). We use a simplified mathematical model of just two times scales to elucidate the above question in a purified setting. Our mathematical results show that, even in such a simple model, the repetition frequency of stimulation plays an important role for the successful induction, and stabilization, of potentiation.

Indexed as

bistabilityLTPplasticitystimulation frequencysynaptic consolidation

Identifiers

PMID31798436
PMCPMC6874130
OpenAlexW2982051795

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.