ArticleFrontiers in neurology2021
Case Study: Mapping Evoked Fields in Primary Motor and Sensory Areas
Article in Frontiers in neurology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Roadmap for Implanting Electrode Arrays to Evoke Tactile Sensations Through Intracortical Stimulation.Human brain mapping · 2024Article
- A roadmap for implanting microelectrode arrays to evoke tactile sensations through intracortical microstimulation.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2024Article
- Tessellation of artificial touch via microstimulation of human somatosensory cortex.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2023Article
- Bilirubin Encephalopathy.Current neurology and neuroscience reports · 2022Review
- Historical perspectives, challenges, and future directions of implantable brain-computer interfaces for sensorimotor applications.Bioelectronic medicine · 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
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Devices interfacing with the brain through implantation in cortical or subcortical structures have great potential for restoration and rehabilitation in patients with sensory or motor dysfunction. Typical implantation surgeries are planned based on maps of brain activity generated from intact function. However, mapping brain activity for planning implantation surgeries is challenging in the target population due to abnormal residual function and, increasingly often, existing MRI-incompatible implanted hardware. Here, we present methods and results for mapping impaired somatosensory and motor function in an individual with paralysis and an existing brain-computer interface (BCI) device. Magnetoencephalography (MEG) was used to directly map the neural activity evoked during transcutaneous electrical stimulation and attempted movement of the impaired hand. Evoked fields were found to align with the expected anatomy and somatotopic organization. This approach may be valuable for guiding implants in other applications, such as cortical stimulation for pain and to improve implant targeting to help reduce the craniotomy size.
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.