经颅磁刺激测定运动阈值的三种新方法优于传统方法。

IF 3.7 3区 医学 Q2 ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL Journal of neural engineering Pub Date : 2023-09-13 DOI:10.1088/1741-2552/acf1cc
Boshuo Wang, Angel V Peterchev, Stefan M Goetz
{"title":"经颅磁刺激测定运动阈值的三种新方法优于传统方法。","authors":"Boshuo Wang, Angel V Peterchev, Stefan M Goetz","doi":"10.1088/1741-2552/acf1cc","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><i>Objective</i>. Thresholding of neural responses is central to many applications of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), but the stochastic aspect of neuronal activity and motor evoked potentials (MEPs) challenges thresholding techniques. We analyzed existing methods for obtaining TMS motor threshold and their variations, introduced new methods from other fields, and compared their accuracy and speed.<i>Approach</i>. In addition to existing relative-frequency methods, such as the five-out-of-ten method, we examined adaptive methods based on a probabilistic motor threshold model using maximum-likelihood (ML) or maximum<i>a-posteriori</i>(MAP) estimation. To improve the performance of these adaptive estimation methods, we explored variations in the estimation procedure and inclusion of population-level prior information. We adapted a Bayesian estimation method which iteratively incorporated information of the TMS responses into the probability density function. A family of non-parametric stochastic root-finding methods with different convergence criteria and stepping rules were explored as well. The performance of the thresholding methods was evaluated with an independent stochastic MEP model.<i>Main Results</i>. The conventional relative-frequency methods required a large number of stimuli, were inherently biased on the population level, and had wide error distributions for individual subjects. The parametric estimation methods obtained the thresholds much faster and their accuracy depended on the estimation method, with performance significantly improved when population-level prior information was included. Stochastic root-finding methods were comparable to adaptive estimation methods but were much simpler to implement and did not rely on a potentially inaccurate underlying estimation model.<i>Significance</i>. Two-parameter MAP estimation, Bayesian estimation, and stochastic root-finding methods have better error convergence compared to conventional single-parameter ML estimation, and all these methods require significantly fewer TMS pulses for accurate estimation than conventional relative-frequency methods. Stochastic root-finding appears particularly attractive due to the low computational requirements, simplicity of the algorithmic implementation, and independence from potential model flaws in the parametric estimators.</p>","PeriodicalId":16753,"journal":{"name":"Journal of neural engineering","volume":"20 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10516469/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Three novel methods for determining motor threshold with transcranial magnetic stimulation outperform conventional procedures.\",\"authors\":\"Boshuo Wang, Angel V Peterchev, Stefan M Goetz\",\"doi\":\"10.1088/1741-2552/acf1cc\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><i>Objective</i>. Thresholding of neural responses is central to many applications of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), but the stochastic aspect of neuronal activity and motor evoked potentials (MEPs) challenges thresholding techniques. We analyzed existing methods for obtaining TMS motor threshold and their variations, introduced new methods from other fields, and compared their accuracy and speed.<i>Approach</i>. In addition to existing relative-frequency methods, such as the five-out-of-ten method, we examined adaptive methods based on a probabilistic motor threshold model using maximum-likelihood (ML) or maximum<i>a-posteriori</i>(MAP) estimation. To improve the performance of these adaptive estimation methods, we explored variations in the estimation procedure and inclusion of population-level prior information. We adapted a Bayesian estimation method which iteratively incorporated information of the TMS responses into the probability density function. A family of non-parametric stochastic root-finding methods with different convergence criteria and stepping rules were explored as well. The performance of the thresholding methods was evaluated with an independent stochastic MEP model.<i>Main Results</i>. The conventional relative-frequency methods required a large number of stimuli, were inherently biased on the population level, and had wide error distributions for individual subjects. The parametric estimation methods obtained the thresholds much faster and their accuracy depended on the estimation method, with performance significantly improved when population-level prior information was included. Stochastic root-finding methods were comparable to adaptive estimation methods but were much simpler to implement and did not rely on a potentially inaccurate underlying estimation model.<i>Significance</i>. Two-parameter MAP estimation, Bayesian estimation, and stochastic root-finding methods have better error convergence compared to conventional single-parameter ML estimation, and all these methods require significantly fewer TMS pulses for accurate estimation than conventional relative-frequency methods. Stochastic root-finding appears particularly attractive due to the low computational requirements, simplicity of the algorithmic implementation, and independence from potential model flaws in the parametric estimators.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16753,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of neural engineering\",\"volume\":\"20 5\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10516469/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of neural engineering\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1088/1741-2552/acf1cc\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of neural engineering","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1088/1741-2552/acf1cc","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

客观的神经反应阈值是经颅磁刺激(TMS)许多应用的核心,但神经元活动和运动诱发电位(MEP)的随机性对阈值技术提出了挑战。我们分析了现有的TMS电机阈值获取方法及其变化,介绍了其他领域的新方法,并比较了它们的准确性和速度。方法除了现有的相对频率方法,如五取十方法,我们还研究了基于概率运动阈值模型的自适应方法,该模型使用最大似然(ML)或最大后验(MAP)估计。为了提高这些自适应估计方法的性能,我们探索了估计过程中的变化和种群水平先验信息的包含。我们采用了贝叶斯估计方法,该方法将TMS响应的信息迭代地结合到概率密度函数中。研究了一类具有不同收敛准则和步进规则的非参数随机寻根方法。使用独立的随机MEP模型评估阈值方法的性能。主要结果。传统的相对频率方法需要大量的刺激,在群体水平上具有固有的偏见,并且在个体受试者中具有广泛的误差分布。参数估计方法获得阈值的速度要快得多,其准确性取决于估计方法,当包含总体水平的先验信息时,性能显著提高。随机寻根方法与自适应估计方法相当,但实现起来要简单得多,并且不依赖于潜在的不准确的潜在估计模型。意义与传统的单参数ML估计相比,双参数MAP估计、贝叶斯估计和随机寻根方法具有更好的误差收敛性,并且所有这些方法都比传统的相对频率方法需要更少的TMS脉冲来进行精确估计。随机寻根由于计算要求低、算法实现简单以及独立于参数估计器中潜在的模型缺陷而显得特别有吸引力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Three novel methods for determining motor threshold with transcranial magnetic stimulation outperform conventional procedures.

Objective. Thresholding of neural responses is central to many applications of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), but the stochastic aspect of neuronal activity and motor evoked potentials (MEPs) challenges thresholding techniques. We analyzed existing methods for obtaining TMS motor threshold and their variations, introduced new methods from other fields, and compared their accuracy and speed.Approach. In addition to existing relative-frequency methods, such as the five-out-of-ten method, we examined adaptive methods based on a probabilistic motor threshold model using maximum-likelihood (ML) or maximuma-posteriori(MAP) estimation. To improve the performance of these adaptive estimation methods, we explored variations in the estimation procedure and inclusion of population-level prior information. We adapted a Bayesian estimation method which iteratively incorporated information of the TMS responses into the probability density function. A family of non-parametric stochastic root-finding methods with different convergence criteria and stepping rules were explored as well. The performance of the thresholding methods was evaluated with an independent stochastic MEP model.Main Results. The conventional relative-frequency methods required a large number of stimuli, were inherently biased on the population level, and had wide error distributions for individual subjects. The parametric estimation methods obtained the thresholds much faster and their accuracy depended on the estimation method, with performance significantly improved when population-level prior information was included. Stochastic root-finding methods were comparable to adaptive estimation methods but were much simpler to implement and did not rely on a potentially inaccurate underlying estimation model.Significance. Two-parameter MAP estimation, Bayesian estimation, and stochastic root-finding methods have better error convergence compared to conventional single-parameter ML estimation, and all these methods require significantly fewer TMS pulses for accurate estimation than conventional relative-frequency methods. Stochastic root-finding appears particularly attractive due to the low computational requirements, simplicity of the algorithmic implementation, and independence from potential model flaws in the parametric estimators.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of neural engineering
Journal of neural engineering 工程技术-工程:生物医学
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
12.50%
发文量
319
审稿时长
4.2 months
期刊介绍: The goal of Journal of Neural Engineering (JNE) is to act as a forum for the interdisciplinary field of neural engineering where neuroscientists, neurobiologists and engineers can publish their work in one periodical that bridges the gap between neuroscience and engineering. The journal publishes articles in the field of neural engineering at the molecular, cellular and systems levels. The scope of the journal encompasses experimental, computational, theoretical, clinical and applied aspects of: Innovative neurotechnology; Brain-machine (computer) interface; Neural interfacing; Bioelectronic medicines; Neuromodulation; Neural prostheses; Neural control; Neuro-rehabilitation; Neurorobotics; Optical neural engineering; Neural circuits: artificial & biological; Neuromorphic engineering; Neural tissue regeneration; Neural signal processing; Theoretical and computational neuroscience; Systems neuroscience; Translational neuroscience; Neuroimaging.
期刊最新文献
Building consensus on clinical outcome assessments for BCI devices. A summary of the 10th BCI society meeting 2023 workshop. o-CLEAN: a novel multi-stage algorithm for the ocular artifacts' correction from EEG data in out-of-the-lab applications. PDMS/CNT electrodes with bioamplifier for practical in-the-ear and conventional biosignal recordings. DOCTer: a novel EEG-based diagnosis framework for disorders of consciousness. I see artifacts: ICA-based EEG artifact removal does not improve deep network decoding across three BCI tasks.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1