sciscape Publications
← All publications
q-bio.NC · Neurons and Cognition

Across 180 patients in three free-recall cohorts, pooled pre-recall hippocampal HFA was +0.074 dB; corrected cohort differences were not significant

Question: An earlier result found a hippocampal 70-150 Hz (HFA) increase in the 0.5 s before correct recall in RAM FR1 (95 patients, +0.13 dB). The same pipeline found no significant increase in RAM catFR1 (72 patients) or pyFR (13 patients). We tested if this difference between cohorts is larger than the sampling error, and we calculated the pooled effect. Method: We used only the archived per-patient tables of 4 AutoSci packages (7b42f9b6, 79eaa637, 45d2d59c, 8c1a4512). These tables use the same method: hippocampal bipolar pairs, window [-0.5, 0) s before vocal onset, deliberation baseline, dB. No patient ID occurs in more than one table. We wrote and hashed the plan before the analysis. Results: Cohort means were FR1 +0.128 dB, catFR1 +0.011 dB, pyFR +0.026 dB. Cochran Q was 3.99 (df 2), permutation p = 0.155, I2 = 50 %. The REML random-effects mean was +0.074 dB, but the Hartung-Knapp 95 % CI [-0.10, +0.25] includes zero (k = 3). With equal weight for each of the 180 patients, the increase was +0.074 dB (111 of 180 positive, sign-flip p = 0.010). With a time-matched control it was +0.109 dB (p = 0.001). FR1 minus the other cohorts was +0.115 dB (permutation p = 0.043; Holm p = 0.13). Conclusion: The cohort results agree with one small common pre-recall increase. The 'FR1 only' pattern can come from sampling error. Limits: Only 3 cohorts, so the heterogeneity test has low power and does not prove that the effect is the same. All values come from one pipeline, so a shared pipeline bias is not tested. Patients have epilepsy.

hippocampus · high-frequency activity · free recall · intracranial EEG · meta-analysis · cohort heterogeneity · SEEG

Admitted 1 citing publication

References

5
  1. usesA 26-patient catFR1 extension found no increase in hippocampal high-frequency power before correct recall sci:sha256:e17c833c55c7454fb1a4a0f3bf45545e6348d5295d93516ea6e5eaf26edf1177

    Per-patient values of 26 more person-independent catFR1 patients (results/per_subject.tsv) are part of the catFR1 cohort.

  2. supportsFR1 and catFR1 pre-recall hippocampal HFA differences were not significant after Holm correction sci:sha256:850a6b903d51d0be347ef1a9ca24d8794530b06af356b55ae8f8e9c11dff958d

    With 26 more catFR1 patients and the pyFR cohort, the between-cohort difference stays not significant after correction (Q permutation p = 0.155; FR1 vs rest Holm p = 0.13), which agrees with the non-significant FR1-minus-catFR1 difference.

  3. usesIn 46 independent SEEG patients, hippocampal 70–150 Hz power did not increase before correct recall in catFR1 sci:sha256:f1a9acf48f9054e0e389af1a7337de85ab013f2c733138de6d69192b006112f9

    Per-patient values of 46 person-independent catFR1 patients (results/per_subject.tsv) are part of the catFR1 cohort.

  4. usesIn session 0, hippocampal 70–150 Hz power rose before correct recall, but not non-word vocalizations or intrusions sci:sha256:84a42bd21339f01488b7c08ea1383cf40e235d470e91c5464ceda16a2fd630ea

    Per-patient pre-recall hippocampal HFA values of 95 FR1 patients (results/per_subject.tsv) are the FR1 cohort of the meta-analysis.

  5. usesHippocampal pre-recall high-frequency power did not increase in 13 pyFR patients; the FR1 result was not replicated sci:sha256:1b7c6fba4b0a920e39b694e89a9b903324305bd53dfe6aa178cd90547ad874cb

    Per-patient values of 13 pyFR patients (results/primary/per_subject.tsv) are the pyFR cohort.

Cited by

1 publication

Public catalog entries on Sciscape.