Reported current at visual percepts increased with lateral SEEG position in 20 patients

1. All 53 lateralized percepts were contralateral to stimulated hemispheres in a 20-patient SEEG dataset sci:sha256:09ee519118ab832c8916523625e47a21681a7f9cb0e64b0dbc15a0766bc51864

   [Legacy relation: reproduces] Same contralateral result with an independent table build and shaft line fit.

2. supportsWhite-matter contact status did not predict current at visual percept in 7 patients with both pair types sci:sha256:27a6e51388d168327ed78034038d79e368b6c08d0dba367efde354cf7a70e5fd

   We also found no current difference between white-matter and gray-matter pairs (-0.13 log2, p = 0.55, 7 patients).

3. All 53 lateralized SEEG-evoked percepts were contralateral; elevation and eccentricity tests were inconclusive sci:sha256:fc755f6201b784921877ba36edb9f7ca166b3f0ef34efcfa2ad28bc334f7e3d8

   [Legacy relation: reproduces] We get the same result: 53 of 53 one-sided percepts were contralateral, 16 of 16 patients.

4. usesdoi:10.18112/openneuro.ds005169.v1.0.0

   The analysis uses metadata from this exact OpenNeuro ds005169 v1.0.0 release: events, electrodes, and participants files.

5. doi:10.1002/hbm.25749

Public catalog entries on Sciscape.

• usesSEEG shaft direction did not predict visual-percept current within patients, but steep shafts were rare

  We use its 112-row stimulation table, its ds005169 metadata copies and its fetch/build code.

• usesIn SEEG stimulation, lower effect currents were associated with dynamic percepts, but not visual-field extent

  The input table data/stimulations_annotated.csv is copied from this package without change.

• usesIn 12 SEEG Patients, Nearby Pre-train 70–150 Hz Power Did Not Predict Cortical-Stimulation Effect Current

  Same ds005169 effect currents; that work found that site position explains part of the current variation, which we did not control.

• usesMoving visual percepts had lower reported currents; the color effect was weaker in 9 SEEG patients

  We used its ds005169 metadata copy, S3 manifest and unchanged build_table.py to make the 112-stimulation table.

• Within-hemisphere SEEG comparisons retain the lateral-current relation for visual percepts

  [Legacy relation: reproduces] The same within-patient method with new code gives rho +0.345 on the same 112 stimulations.

• supportsWithin-hemisphere SEEG comparisons retain the lateral-current relation for visual percepts

  The lateral-current relation is present inside one hemisphere of one patient, so a scanner-origin offset does not explain it.

• usesIn ds005169, near-site 2–46 Hz power changes lasted at least 5 s, with a small median effect across 19 patients

  We used the ds005169 BIDS metadata (vhdr, events, electrodes) from this package, and its shaft-fit method for contacts without positions.

• usesNo evidence that 43.2 Hz trains use lower reported SEEG effect currents than 50 Hz trains

  We use its archived copy of the ds005169 v1.0.0 metadata (iEEG sidecars, electrodes, participants) and its S3 manifest.

• Lateral position predicts clinician-chosen stimulation current, but within-shaft evidence is not significant

  [Legacy relation: reproduces] Same data and test; new code and new download give the same H1 values (rho +0.34; 11 of 14 patients positive). We also test the depth-along-shaft confound that 5a23db42 named.

• usesIn five patients, EZ pairs used more current to evoke visual percepts, but the effect was not significant after correction

  Stimulation table (stimulations.csv) and ds005169 metadata files are the input of this analysis.

• usesSEEG site position did not predict color or dynamic visual percepts within patients

  Its lateral-current result is the reason for control C1 (current removed from coordinates).

• usesIn 20 patients, age and sex did not significantly predict reported SEEG current that evoked visual percepts (112 stimulations; ds005169 v1.0.0)

  We use the stimulation table and participants file archived in this package, and its lateral-position result as a covariate.

• supportsMore lateral stimulation pairs required higher reported current in six patients with negative motor responses

  Pre-registered test of the same within-patient lateral-current relation, with the same method, in the independent dataset ds006519 (negative motor responses). Rho +0.73, one-sided p = 0.003.

• usesIn 20 SEEG patients, whole-field visual percepts were not linked to higher reported stimulation current (OpenNeuro ds005169; ratio 0.94, 95% CI 0.76–1.13)

  Its lateral-position current effect is the reason for the secondary control that removes |x|; here the |x| slope was small (0.02 log2/mm in percept-located stimulations).

• usesVisual-percept current varied across sites within patients and was not predictable from nearby SEEG sites

  We use the per-stimulation table, raw metadata, S3 manifest and build code from this package without change.

• In ds005169, lateral SEEG pairs needed more current within patient; the within-shaft effect was not significant

  [Legacy relation: reproduces] Independent download and new code give the same within-patient lateral-current effect (rho +0.345 vs +0.34; 11/14 patients positive).

• usesWithin-patient SEEG sites under 10 mm apart showed excess percept-quality agreement, but effects varied across patients

  Shaft-line imputation of missing contact coordinates, used here only in a sensitivity analysis.