ArticlebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology2025
Real-time Bayesian optimization of deep brain stimulation for personalized cognitive control enhancement.
Article in bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Identifying effective deep brain stimulation (DBS) parameters for psychiatric disorders has historically been a time-consuming and error prone process due to a lack of an objective and rapid readout of target circuit engagement. Cognitive control may have use as a biomarker of treatment efficacy but it has yet to be shown that DBS parameters can be reliably optimized to produce cognitive control improvements in individual subjects. Objective: We sought to leverage a rat model of DBS-driven cognitive control improvements to determine whether state of the art optimization algorithms could consistently identify effective stimulation amplitudes to enhance cognition. Methods: We delivered periods of active and inactive DBS-like stimulation at variable parameters while rats performed a Set-Shifting task that we previously showed to be stimulation-sensitive. We tested both predefined settings of interest and settings that were personalized to individual animals using Bayesian Optimization. Measurements of task performance including reaction time and accuracy were compared between acute, optimized, and traditional settings to evaluate effects on cognitive control. Results: Acute stimulation reduced reaction times without hindering accuracy (N=15), replicating the effects previously observed with chronic stimulation. In a second cohort (N=6), optimization of stimulation amplitude successfully reduced reaction times in all animals with comparable effect size to historically best settings. Conclusion: These findings confirm that optimization techniques can be effective for improving symptomatically-relevant cognitive markers supporting the feasibility of personalized, quantitatively-informed approaches to neuromodulation and target engagement for psychiatric and/or cognitive disorders.
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.