Home › Research › Treatments
Focusing effect of acetylcholine on neuroplasticity in the human motor cortex
Kuo MF, Grosch J, Fregni F, Paulus W, Nitsche MA.. The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience, 2007-12-01
Topic: Brain proteins, microglia and lab models
Cholinergic neuromodulation is pivotal for arousal, attention, and cognitive processes. Loss or dysregulation of cholinergic inputs leads to cognitive impairments like those manifested in Alzheimer's disease. Such dysfunction can be at least partially restored by an increase of acetylcholine (ACh). In animal studies, ACh selectively facilitates long-term excitability changes induced by feed-forward afferent input. Consequently, it has been hypothesized that ACh enhances the signal-to-noise ratio of input processing. However, the neurophysiological foundation for its ability to enhance cognition in humans is not well documented. In this study we explore the effects of rivastigmine, a cholinesterase inhibitor, on global and synapse-specific forms of cortical plasticity induced by transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and paired associative stimulation (PAS) on 10-12 healthy subjects, respectively. Rivastigmine essentially blocked the induction of the global excitability enhancement elicited by anodal tDCS and revealed a tendency to first reduce and then stabilize cathodal tDCS-induced inhibitory aftereffects. However, ACh enhanced the synapse-specific excitability enhancement produced by facilitatory PAS and consolidated the inhibitory PAS-induced excitability diminution. These findings are in line with a cholinergic focusing effect that optimizes the detection of relevant signals during information processing in humans.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Kuo, M. F., Grosch, J., Fregni, F., Paulus, W., & Nitsche, M. A. (2007). Focusing effect of acetylcholine on neuroplasticity in the human motor cortex. The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience. https://doi.org/10.1523/jneurosci.4104-07.2007
Vancouver
Kuo MF, Grosch J, Fregni F, Paulus W, Nitsche MA. Focusing effect of acetylcholine on neuroplasticity in the human motor cortex. The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience. 2007. doi:10.1523/jneurosci.4104-07.2007. PMID: 18160652.
BibTeX
@article{kuo2007-18160652,
author = {Kuo, M. F. and Grosch, J. and Fregni, F. and Paulus, W. and Nitsche, M. A.},
title = {{Focusing effect of acetylcholine on neuroplasticity in the human motor cortex}},
journal = {The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience},
year = {2007},
doi = {10.1523/jneurosci.4104-07.2007},
pmid = {18160652},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1523/jneurosci.4104-07.2007}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- Rivastigmine essentially blocked the induction of the global excitability enhancement elicited by anodal tDCS and revealed a tendency to first reduce and then stabilize cathodal tDCS-induced inhibitory aftereffects.
- These findings are in line with a cholinergic focusing effect that optimizes the detection of relevant signals during information processing in humans.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Treatments →
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 41/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported and randomized / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and multicenter collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 24 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 41 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 0 / 12 | No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Strength of evidence | 1 / 5 | Rated “low” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 1 / 5 | 2007 — within 20 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 0 / 4 | Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Studied in people | 3 / 3 | Studied in people (pubmed indexes it as a clinical or observational study) |
| Randomized / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomization or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | — / 7 | No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score |
| Citations per year | — / 5 | No citation count or no year — left out of this score |
| Impact for its field and year | — / 6 | No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score |
| Cited by studies here | — / 6 | Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score |
| Still being cited | — / 4 | No yearly citation counts — left out of this score |
| Senior author's track record | — / 4 | Senior author's record not available — left out of this score |
| Institution's track record | — / 3 | No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Multicenter collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 18160652) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 24 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 24 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 41 out of 100. |
| Total | 41 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.
Related
Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.
Related studies in Treatments
Also in Treatments
192 studies in the library are filed under Treatments with no topic tag they share with another; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed tour of them. The Treatments hub.