ArticleFrontiers in neuroscience2025
Personalized temporal interference stimulation targeting striatum reduces functional stability and dynamic connectivity variability in the sensorimotor network.
Article in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Personalized high-intensity temporal interference stimulation decouples cerebellar networks to enhance implicit learning.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2026Trial
- Mapping the Global Trajectory and Key Trends of Temporal Interference Stimulation.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Functional stability within brain networks, particularly the sensorimotor network (SMN), is crucial for coherent motor control. Temporal Interference (TI) stimulation offers a non-invasive method to modulate deep brain structures like the striatum, yet its impact on dynamic functional stability across motor networks remains largely unexplored. Methods: Twenty-six healthy male participants separately underwent TI stimulation and Sham stimulation in a crossover, double-blind, randomized controlled trial with counterbalanced protocol. resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging (rs-fMRI) was acquired before and during the stimulation. A total of 20 min TI stimulation (10 mA, Δf = 20 Hz) was applied to the right striatum using personalized electrode montages optimized. Dynamic functional connectivity (dFC) was computed using a sliding-window approach. Voxel-wise functional stability across the whole brain was quantified by Kendall's concordance coefficient of voxel-to-voxel dFC. Seed-based dFC variability in the right striatum was measured as the standard deviation of dFC across windows. Results: (1) Functional stability: TI stimulation significantly decreased functional stability in bilateral SMA regions (predominantly SMA proper, with parts of pre-SMA) compared to Sham and baseline conditions ( Conclusion: Our findings indicate that TI stimulation targeting the striatum effectively modulates sensorimotor network stability and dFC variability within the cortico-striatal pathway, highlighting its potential as a non-invasive neuromodulation approach for motor network disorders. Clinical trial registration: [www.chictr.org.cn;], identifier [ChiCTR2500098699].
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.