2021
DOI: 10.1016/j.brs.2021.02.003
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

An analytical approach to identify indirect multisensory cortical activations elicited by TMS?

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
2

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…First, we show a replication of the relationship between M1-P15 and iSP, such that the larger the M1-P15, the greater the normalized iSP area. Importantly, control analyses ruled out the risk of an artifactual or sensory contamination that could have explained the relationship between the two measures, showing that neither M1-P15 amplitude nor iSP normalized area were associated with TMS intensity (Niessen et al, 2021). The characterization of early TEP components as reflecting contralateral activation in the motor network is consistent with previous TMS-EEG studies, in which brain source modeling localized the response in the first tens of ms after left M1 stimulation in the right M1 (Ilmoniemi et al, 1997;Zazio et al, 2021), and more generally with findings from double-coil paradigms (Ferbert et al, 1992;Ni et al, 2020).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…First, we show a replication of the relationship between M1-P15 and iSP, such that the larger the M1-P15, the greater the normalized iSP area. Importantly, control analyses ruled out the risk of an artifactual or sensory contamination that could have explained the relationship between the two measures, showing that neither M1-P15 amplitude nor iSP normalized area were associated with TMS intensity (Niessen et al, 2021). The characterization of early TEP components as reflecting contralateral activation in the motor network is consistent with previous TMS-EEG studies, in which brain source modeling localized the response in the first tens of ms after left M1 stimulation in the right M1 (Ilmoniemi et al, 1997;Zazio et al, 2021), and more generally with findings from double-coil paradigms (Ferbert et al, 1992;Ni et al, 2020).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the exploratory analysis on TEP peaks, we focused on the early components within 100 ms to avoid confounds related to the TMS sensory processing (Herring, Esterer, Marshall, Jensen, & Bergmann, 2019; Niessen, Bracco, Mutanen, & Robertson, 2021; Nikouline, Ruohonen, & Ilmoniemi, 1999). Peaks’ amplitude and latency were extracted from electrode CP4, which showed the highest signal in all components in the mean of all conditions, by averaging over 10 ms around the peak.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the present study, we provide a replication of this relationship, such that the larger the M1-P15, the greater the normalized iSP area (Figure 2A). Importantly, control analyses ruled out the risk of an artifactual contamination that could have explained the relationship between the two measures, showing that neither M1-P15 amplitude nor iSP normalized area were associated with TMS intensity (Figure 2B-C; [38]). The characterization of early TEP components as reflecting contralateral activation in the motor network is consistent with previous TMS-EEG studies, in which brain source modeling localized the response in the first tens of ms after left M1 stimulation in the right M1 [4,18], and more generally with evidence from double-coil paradigms [36,39].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%