ArticleJournal of neurophysiology2022
Modeling relationships between rhythmic processes and neuronal spike timing.
Article in Journal of neurophysiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Neurons are embedded in complex networks, where they participate in repetitive, coordinated interactions with other neurons. Neuronal spike timing is thus predictably constrained by a range of ionic currents that shape activity at both short (milliseconds) and longer (tens to hundreds of milliseconds) timescales, but we lack analytical tools to rigorously identify these relationships. Here, we innovate a modeling approach to test the relationship between oscillations in the local field potential (LFP) and neuronal spike timing. We use kernel density estimation to relate single neuron spike timing and the phase of LFP rhythms (in simulated and hippocampal CA1 neuronal spike trains). We then combine phase and short (3 ms) spike history information within a logistic regression framework ("phaseSH models"), and show that models that leverage refractory constraints and oscillatory phase information can effectively test whether-and the degree to which-rhythmic currents (as measured from the LFP) reliably explain variance in neuronal spike trains. This approach allows researchers to systematically test the relationship between oscillatory activity and neuronal spiking dynamics as they unfold over time and as they shift to adapt to distinct behavioral conditions.
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.