Figure - PMC

Skip to main content

An official website of the United States government

Here's how you know

Here's how you know

Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

View full-text article in PMC

. 2020 Feb 10;10(2):94. doi: 10.3390/brainsci10020094

Search in PMC
Search in PubMed
View in NLM Catalog
Add to search

© 2020 by the authors.

Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

PMC Copyright notice

(a,b) GLM model (with probit link) for the post-intervention FRT success rate (%) with the lobular maximum electric field strength as the predictor in (a), and with the lobular median electric field strength as the predictor in the (b). The plot shows the observed and estimated the FRT success rate (%) versus the predictor values as well as the residuals where the FRT success rate (%) found to be more sensitive to lobular median electric field strength (slope 0.17—Figure 8b) than the lobular maximum electric field strength (slope 0.09—Figure 8a). (c,d) GLM model (with probit link) for the post-intervention FRT success rate (%) with the median electric field strength in dentate nuclei as the predictor in the c), and with the median electric field strength in the bilateral cerebellar leg area lobules as the predictor in the (d). The plot shows the observed and estimated the FRT success rate (%) versus the predictor values as well as the residuals where the FRT success rate (%) found to be more sensitive to the leg area lobular median electric field strength (slope 0.34—Figure 8d) than the dentate nuclei median electric field strength (slope 0.27—Figure 8c).

(a,b) GLM model (with probit link) for the post-intervention FRT success rate (%) with the lobular maximum electric field strength as the predictor in (a), and with the lobular median electric field strength as the predictor in the (b). The plot shows the observed and estimated the FRT success rate (%) versus the predictor values as well as the residuals where the FRT success rate (%) found to be more sensitive to lobular median electric field strength (slope 0.17—Figure 8b) than the lobular maximum electric field strength (slope 0.09—Figure 8a). (c,d) GLM model (with probit link) for the post-intervention FRT success rate (%) with the median electric field strength in dentate nuclei as the predictor in the c), and with the median electric field strength in the bilateral cerebellar leg area lobules as the predictor in the (d). The plot shows the observed and estimated the FRT success rate (%) versus the predictor values as well as the residuals where the FRT success rate (%) found to be more sensitive to the leg area lobular median electric field strength (slope 0.34—Figure 8d) than the dentate nuclei median electric field strength (slope 0.27—Figure 8c).