ArticleNeuroimage. Reports2021
Resting-state functional connectivity in the attention networks is not altered by offline theta-burst stimulation of the posterior parietal cortex or the temporo-parietal junction as compared to a vertex control site.
Article in Neuroimage. Reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Disruption of resting-state functional connectivity (RSFC) between core regions of the dorsal attention network (DAN), including the bilateral superior parietal lobule (SPL), and structural damage of the right-lateralized ventral attention network (VAN), including the temporo-parietal junction (TPJ), have been described as neural basis for hemispatial neglect. Pursuing a virtual lesion model, we aimed to perturbate the attention networks of 22 healthy subjects by applying continuous theta burst stimulation (cTBS) to the right SPL or TPJ. We first created network masks of the DAN and VAN based on RSFC analyses from a RS-fMRI baseline session and determined the SPL and TPJ stimulation site within the respective mask. We then performed RS-fMRI immediately after cTBS of the SPL, TPJ (active sites) or vertex (control site). RSFC between SPL/TPJ and whole brain as well as between predefined regions of interest (ROI) in the attention networks was analyzed in a within-subject design. Contrary to our hypothesis, seed-based RSFC did not differ between the four experimental conditions. The individual change in ROI-to-ROI RSFC from baseline to post-stimulation did also not differ between active (SPL, TPJ) and control (vertex) cTBS. In our study, a single session offline cTBS over the right SPL or TPJ could not alter RSFC in the attention networks as compared to a control stimulation, maybe because effects wore off too early. Future studies should consider a modified cTBS protocol, concurrent TMS-fMRI or transcranial direct current stimulation.
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.