ArticleFrontiers in physiology2025
A new index of cortical plasticity induced by paired associative stimulation to describe cognitive status in aged healthy subjects.
Article in Frontiers in physiology, 2025. 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Cortical plasticity is a key factor for cognitive skills, and paired associative stimulation (PAS) is useful to study it in humans. Currently, due to the number of non-responders to PAS and discrepancies in the post-PAS time-points assessed, a plasticity index describing PAS effects and correlating it to cognitive status is lacking. Therefore, this study investigated which PAS index better discriminates between responders (RRs) and non-responders (NRs) and correlates with cognitive status. Methods: Seventy-six healthy aged subjects (67.0 ± 7.2 y.o., 35 males) were enrolled. The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), and the Addenbrooke's Cognitive Assessment (ACER) were used to assess cognitive status. Motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) were recorded from the first dorsal interosseous muscle at baseline and after 0, 10, 20, and 30 min from PAS, pairing peripheral median nerve stimulation with a transcranial magnetic stimulation stimulus over the left primary motor cortex. MEP amplitude was used to calculate the grand average (GrA), which is the mostused PAS plasticity index, along with two newly introduced indexes: the curve concavity (CC) and the pre- vs. post-PAS difference (PPPD). CC described the curve shape of the PAS effects, while PPPD calculated the significant differences between the baseline and post-PAS MEP amplitude. Results: CC demonstrated good consistency as PAS-plasticity index with high odds ratios and sensibility in the discrimination of responsiveness to PAS; PPPD had higher specificity in the identification of RRs. Only the MoCA score was significantly higher (p = 0.006) in RRs than in NRs when the two groups were discriminated according to CC, and it significantly correlated with CC (p = 0.013). Discussion: In conclusion, CC may represent a potential PAS-plasticity index to describe the cortical plasticity and cognitive status in humans, with a possible practical application in patients with cognitive impairment.
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.