Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32795456›Full record

ArticleNeuropsychologia2020

Intensity- and timing-dependent modulation of motion perception with transcranial magnetic stimulation of visual cortex.

Olga Lucia Gamboa Arana, Hannah Palmer, Moritz Dannhauer, Connor Hile, Sicong Liu, Rena Hamdan, Alexandra Brito, Roberto Cabeza, Simon W Davis, Angel V Peterchev and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Neuropsychologia, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
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

12 authors.

Olga Lucia Gamboa AranaDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Duke University School of Medicine, USA.
Hannah PalmerDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Duke University School of Medicine, USA.
Moritz DannhauerDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Duke University School of Medicine, USA.
Connor HileDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Duke University School of Medicine, USA.
Sicong LiuDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Duke University School of Medicine, USA.
Rena HamdanDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Duke University School of Medicine, USA.
Alexandra BritoDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Duke University School of Medicine, USA.
Roberto CabezaDepartment of Psychology & Neuroscience, Duke University, USA; Center for Cognitive Neuroscience, Duke University, USA.
Simon W DavisCenter for Cognitive Neuroscience, Duke University, USA; Department of Neurology, Duke University School of Medicine, USA.
Angel V PeterchevDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Duke University School of Medicine, USA; Department of Biomedical Engineering, Duke University, USA; Department of Electrical & Computer Engineering, Duke University, USA; Department of Neurosurgery, Duke University School of Medicine, USA.
Marc A SommerDepartment of Psychology & Neuroscience, Duke University, USA; Center for Cognitive Neuroscience, Duke University, USA; Department of Biomedical Engineering, Duke University, USA; Department of Neurobiology, Duke University School of Medicine, USA.
Lawrence G AppelbaumDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Duke University School of Medicine, USA; Center for Cognitive Neuroscience, Duke University, USA. Electronic address: greg@duke.edu.

Funding

Impact of Timing, Targeting, and Brain State on rTMS of Human and Non-Human PrimatesRF1MH114253 · NIMH · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI SOMMER, MARC A · 2017 to 2017
$3.0M
NIMH NIH HHS RF1 MH114253
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite the widespread use of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) in research and clinical care, the dose-response relations and neurophysiological correlates of modulatory effects remain relatively unexplored. To fill this gap, we studied modulation of visual processing as a function of TMS parameters. Our approach combined electroencephalography (EEG) with application of single pulse TMS to visual cortex as participants performed a motion perception task. During each participants' first visit, motion coherence thresholds, 64-channel visual evoked potentials (VEPs), and TMS resting motor thresholds (RMT) were measured. In second and third visits, single pulse TMS was delivered at one of two latencies, either 30 ms before the onset of motion or at the onset latency of the N2 VEP component derived from the first session. TMS was delivered at 0%, 80%, 100%, or 120% of RMT over the site of N2 peak activity, or at 120% over vertex. Behavioral results demonstrated a significant main effect of TMS timing on accuracy, with better performance when TMS was applied at the N2-Onset timing versus Pre-Onset, as well as a significant interaction, indicating that 80% intensity produced higher accuracy than other conditions at the N2-Onset. TMS effects on the P3 VEP showed reduced amplitudes in the 80% Pre-Onset condition, an increase for the 120% N2-Onset condition, and monotonic amplitude scaling with stimulation intensity. The N2 component was not affected by TMS. These findings reveal the influence of TMS intensity and timing on visual perception and electrophysiological responses, with optimal facilitation at stimulation intensities below RMT.

Indexed as

Motion PerceptionMotor CortexVisual CortexElectroencephalographyEvoked Potentials, VisualHumansTranscranial Magnetic StimulationMotion sensitive cortexTMSTMS Evoked potentialTranscranial magnetic stimulationVisual evoked potentialVisual motion

Identifiers

PMID32795456
PMCPMC7554219

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.