Local and distant responses to single pulse electrical stimulation reflect different forms of connectivity

By Britni Crocker, L. Ostrowski, Ziv M. Williams, D. Dougherty, E. Eskandar, A. Widge, C. Chu, S. Cash, A. Paulk. 2020

Subfields: Cognitive Neuroscience, Neuroscience

Citations in the corpus

• Proper reference selection and re-referencing to mitigate bias in single pulse electrical stimulation data (2024, unknown): “…locations from the stimulation site are quantified (e.g., by amplitude, latency, or overall shape) and interpreted as a proxy of directed causal connectivity for each pair of stimulated-recorded locations (Crocker et al., 2021; Huang et al., 2023; Miller et al., 2021; Schmid et al., 2024).”
• Theta-burst direct electrical stimulation remodels human brain networks (2024, unknown): “…et al., 2008), examine the functional brain architecture (Keller et al., 2011, 2014a; David et al., 2013; Entz et al., 2014; Trebaul et al., 2018; Crocker et al., 2021), and causally examine various brain networks, including the frontoparietal (Matsumoto et al., 2012), hippocampal (Kubota et…”
• Macroscale traveling waves evoked by single-pulse stimulation of the human brain (2023, unknown): “…(Valentín et al., 2002; Lega et al., 2015; Matsumoto et al., 2017), mapping distinct types of connectivity (Entz et al., 2014; Keller et al., 2014a; Crocker et al., 2021a), quantifying signal complexity across levels of consciousness (Comolatti et al., 2019; Arena et al., 2021, 2022; Mofakham et…”
• Why does invasive brain stimulation sometimes improve memory and sometimes impair it? (2024, unknown): “These findings could be explained by the enhanced ability of white matter stimulation to modulate both local and distant neural activity [43,51,63,64], thus allowing for the regulation of broader networks that drive cognitive states [44–47,65 ,66 ].”