ArticleJournal of neural engineering2020
Spatially confined responses of mouse visual cortex to intracortical magnetic stimulation from micro-coils.
Article in Journal of neural engineering, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Micro-Coil Neuromodulation at Single-Cell and Circuit Levels for Inhibiting Natural Neuroactivity, Neutralizing Electric Neural Excitation, and Suppressing Seizures.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2025Article
- Microfabrication Technologies for Nanoinvasive and High-Resolution Magnetic Neuromodulation.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2024Review
- Transparent and Conformal Microcoil Arrays for Spatially Selective Neuronal Activation.Device · 2024Article
- Thermal safety considerations for implantable micro-coil design.Journal of neural engineering · 2023Article
- Micro-magnetic stimulation of primary visual cortex induces focal and sustained activation of secondary visual cortex.Philosophical transactions. Series A, Mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences · 2022Article
- Article
- Ultra-Sharp Nanowire Arrays Natively Permeate, Record, and Stimulate Intracellular Activity in Neuronal and Cardiac Networks.Advanced functional materials · 2022Article
- Energy-Efficient Integrated Circuit Solutions Toward Miniaturized Closed-Loop Neural Interface Systems.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2021Review
- MEMS inductor fabrication and emerging applications in power electronics and neurotechnologies.Microsystems & nanoengineering · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveElectrical stimulation via microelectrodes implanted in cortex has been suggested as a potential treatment for a wide range of neurological disorders. Despite some success however, the effectiveness of conventional electrodes remains limited, in part due to an inability to create specific patterns of neural activity around each electrode and in part due to challenges with maintaining a stable interface. The use of implantable micro-coils to magnetically stimulate the cortex has the potential to overcome these limitations because the asymmetric fields from coils can be harnessed to selectively activate some neurons, e.g. vertically-oriented pyramidal neurons while avoiding others, e.g. horizontally-oriented passing axons. In vitro experiments have shown that activation is indeed confined with micro-coils but their effectiveness in the intact brain of living animals has not been evaluated. APPROACH: To assess the efficacy of stimulation, a 128-channel custom recording microelectrode array was positioned on the surface of the visual cortex (ECoG) in anesthetized mice and responses to magnetic and electric stimulation were compared. Stimulation was delivered from electrodes or micro-coils implanted through a hole in the center of the recording array at a rate of 200 pulses per second for 100 ms. MAIN
resultsBoth electric and magnetic stimulation reliably elicited cortical responses, although activation from electric stimulation was spatially expansive, often extending more than 1 mm from the stimulation site, while activation from magnetic stimulation was typically confined to a ∼300 µm diameter region around the stimulation site. Results were consistent for stimulation of both cortical layer 2/3 and layer 5 as well as across a range of stimulus strengths. SIGNIFICANCE: The improved focality with magnetic stimulation suggests that the effectiveness of cortical stimulation can be improved. Improved focality may be particularly attractive for cortical prostheses that require high spatial resolution, e.g. devices that target sensory cortex, as it may lead to improved acuity.
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.