ArticleScientific reports2024
Ex vivo propagation of synaptically-evoked cortical depolarizations in a mouse model of Alzheimer's disease at 20 Hz, 40 Hz, or 83 Hz.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Neurobiological mechanisms of 40-Hz stimulation in Alzheimer's disease: evidence, heterogeneity, and constraints.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2026Review
- Large-Scale Neural Recording Technologies for Investigating Circuit Dysfunction and Functional Biomarker Discovery in Animal Models of Alzheimer's Disease.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Vulnerability of short-term memory in a mouse model of Alzheimer's disease.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Sensory stimulations at 40 Hz gamma (but not any other frequency), have shown promise in reversing Alzheimer's disease (AD)-related pathologies. What distinguishes 40 Hz? We hypothesized that stimuli at 40 Hz might summate more efficiently (temporal summation) or propagate more efficiently between cortical layers (vertically), or along cortical laminas (horizontally), compared to inputs at 20 or 83 Hz. To investigate these hypotheses, we used brain slices from AD mouse model animals (5xFAD). Extracellular (synaptic) stimuli were delivered in cortical layer 4 (L4). Leveraging a fluorescent voltage indicator (VSFP) expressed in cortical pyramidal neurons, we simultaneously monitored evoked cortical depolarizations at multiple sites, at 1 kHz sampling frequency. Experimental groups (AD-Female, CTRL-Female, AD-Male, and CTRL-Male) were tested at three stimulation frequencies (20, 40, and 83 Hz). Despite our initial hypothesis, two parameters-temporal summation of voltage waveforms and the strength of propagation through the cortical neuropil-did not reveal any distinct advantage of 40 Hz stimulation. Significant physiological differences between AD and Control mice were found at all stimulation frequencies tested, while the 40 Hz stimulation frequency was not remarkable.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.