ArticleFrontiers in computational neuroscience2023
Improving focality and consistency in micromagnetic stimulation.
Article in Frontiers in computational neuroscience, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- High-Frequency Weak Magnetic-Field Detection and Dose Calibration for Micro-Magnetic Stimulation: A Review.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Microfabrication Technologies for Nanoinvasive and High-Resolution Magnetic Neuromodulation.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2024Review
- Cellular mechanisms underlying carry-over effects after magnetic stimulation.Scientific reports · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The novel micromagnetic stimulation (μMS) technology aims to provide high resolution on neuronal targets. However, consistency of neural activation could be compromised by a lack of surgical accuracy, biological variation, and human errors in operation. We have recently modeled the activation of an unmyelinated axon by a circular micro-coil. Although the coil could activate the axon, its performance sometimes lacked focality and consistency. The site of axonal activation could shift by several experimental factors, including the reversal of the coil current, displacement of the coil, and changes in the intensity of the stimulation. Current clinical practice with transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) has suggested that figure-eight coils could provide better performance in magnetic stimulation than circular coils. Here, we estimate the performance of μMS by a figure-eight micro-coil, by exploring the impact of the same experimental factors on its focality and consistency in axonal activation. We derived the analytical expression of the electric field and activating function generated by the figure-eight micro-coil, and estimated the location of axonal activation. Using NEURON modeling of an unmyelinated axon, we found two different types (A and B) of axon activation by the figure-eight micro-coil, mediated by coil currents of reversed direction. Type A activation is triggered by membrane hyperpolarization followed by depolarization; Type B activation is triggered by direct membrane depolarization. Consequently, the two types of stimulation are governed by distinct ion channel mechanisms. In comparison to the circular micro-coil, the figure-eight micro-coil requires significantly less current for axonal activation. Under figure-eight micro-coil stimulation, the site of axonal activation does not change with the reversal of the coil current, displacement of the coil, or changes in the intensity of the stimulation. Ultimately, the figure-eight micro-coil provides a more efficient and consistent site of activation than the circular micro-coil in μMS.
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.