Cited by 5Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation StudiesNeurological disorders and treatmentsSchizophrenia research and treatment

Targeted neural network interventions for auditory hallucinations: Can TMS inform DBS?

Open access
Taylor, Joseph J., Krystal, John H., D'Souza, Deepak C., Gerrard, Jason Lee, Corlett, Philip R.·2018·Schizophrenia Research

Abstract

The debilitating and refractory nature of auditory hallucinations (AH) in schizophrenia and other psychiatric disorders has stimulated investigations into neuromodulatory interventions that target the aberrant neural networks associated with them. Internal or invasive forms of brain stimulation such as deep brain stimulation (DBS) are currently being explored for treatment-refractory schizophrenia. The process of developing and implementing DBS is limited by symptom clustering within psychiatric constructs as well as a scarcity of causal tools with which to predict response, refine targeting or guide clinical decisions. Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), an external or non-invasive form of brain stimulation, has shown some promise as a therapeutic intervention for AH but remains relatively underutilized as an investigational probe of clinically relevant neural networks. In this editorial, we propose that TMS has the potential to inform DBS by adding individualized causal evidence to an evaluation processes otherwise devoid of it in patients. Although there are significant limitations and safety concerns regarding DBS, the combination of TMS with computational modeling of neuroimaging and neurophysiological data could provide critical insights into more robust and adaptable network modulation.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.schres.2017.09.020

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Blocking NMDA receptors, for example with ketamine, profoundly alters excitatory/inhibitory balance, thus altering the balance between priors and prediction errors.

    “Blocking NMDA receptors (with ketamine for example) profoundly alters E/I balance (89, 90), thus altering the balance between priors and prediction errors (24), perhaps differently at different hierarchical levels (88).”

    From The Predictive Coding Account of Psychosis (2018) · cites this paper as [90]

    The section ‘The Potential for Closed Loop or On-Demand DBS’ (page unavailable) says that top-down priors sculpt perception in auditory hallucinations, and ‘A Potential Role for TMS in DBS Development’ discusses overweighting perceptual priors. But the source does not say that NMDA-receptor blockade or altered excitatory/inhibitory balance changes the balance between priors and prediction errors. The citing sentence attaches this source’s citation to that latter inference, not to the preceding claim about ketamine and E/I balance. (LLM, conf=0.78)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 134 · Cited by 5

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Fox MD, Buckner RL, White MP, Greicius MD, Pascual-Leone A, 2012b. Efficacy of transcranial magnetic stimulation targets for depression is related to intrinsic functional connectivity with the subgenual cingulate. Biol Psychiatry 72(7), 595– 603. 22658708 PMC4120275
  2. George MS, Lisanby SH, Avery D, McDonald WM, Durkalski V, Pavlicova M, Anderson B, Nahas Z, Bulow P, Zarkowski P, Holtzheimer PE 3rd, Schwartz T, Sackeim HA, 2010b. Daily left prefrontal transcranial magnetic stimulation therapy for major depressive disorder: a sham-controlled randomized trial. Arch Gen Psychiatry 67(5), 507– 516. 20439832

Authors
Taylor, J. J., Krystal, J. H., D'Souza, D. C., Gerrard, J. L., & Corlett, P. R.
Affiliations
  • Yale University (US)
  • Yale New Haven Hospital (US)
Corresponding author
Corlett, Philip R.
Venue
Schizophrenia Research
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2018-05
Volume
195
Pages
455-462
ISSN
0920-9964 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2759161865
Cited by
5
References
134
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2018: 2
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Schizophrenia Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH067073, R25MH071584)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Neurology › Neurological disorders and treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
Keywords
auditory hallucinations, transcranial magnetic stimulation
MeSH terms
Brain, Hallucinations, Humans, Neural Pathways, Deep Brain Stimulation, Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review