ArticleNeuroImage2026
Experimental evaluation of an integrated focused ultrasound and electroencephalography approach for developing activation-informed neuroimaging.
Article in NeuroImage, 2026. 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
Abstract
We experimentally evaluated the possibility of using an integrated focused ultrasound (FUS) - electroencephalography (EEG) approach to develop activation-informed neuroimaging for human functional brain mapping, enhancing the power of conventional approaches based solely on recording methods. A brief beam of FUS (50 μs, 4.0 MHz) with a focal transverse profile diameter of 0.4 mm determined in water was applied to the barrel cortex of rat in vivo on the dura, skull and scalp and evoked activity was recorded with EEG. We found using a laminar depth profile analysis and specific channel blockers that the stimulation within a safe pressure range could directly evoke a presynaptic spike (∼1 ms) in layer IV, followed by postsynaptic spikes (2.5-7 ms) in layer V and an excitatory wave (8-12 ms), both regulated by fast inhibition, and a major robust excitatory wave (20-30 ms) regulated by slow inhibition. Stimulus artifact was <1 ms, much shorter than for transcranial magnetic stimulation. All components were reliably detected from the scalp, skull, and dura using the 4 MHz and 2.2 MHz transducers. Thus, the FUS-EEG approach is capable of activating neurons transcranially and noninvasively recording a rich spectrum of excitatory and inhibitory activity starting immediately after stimulation. These characteristics can advance neuroimaging since this approach can identify normal electrophysiology and pathophysiology in known locations anywhere in the brain with precise timing and could possibly enhance the conventional approaches by validating and improving their spatial and temporal accuracy of localization.
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.