Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26260518›Full record

ArticleSystematic reviews2015

Determining the number of stimuli required to reliably assess corticomotor excitability and primary motor cortical representations using transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS): a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Rocco Cavaleri, Siobhan M Schabrun, Lucy S Chipchase

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Systematic reviews, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 27% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Rocco CavaleriBrain Rehabilitation and Neuroplasticity Unit, School of Science and Health, The University of Western Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, 2560, Australia. R.Cavaleri@uws.edu.au.
Siobhan M SchabrunBrain Rehabilitation and Neuroplasticity Unit, School of Science and Health, The University of Western Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, 2560, Australia. S.schabrun@uws.edu.au.
Lucy S ChipchaseBrain Rehabilitation and Neuroplasticity Unit, School of Science and Health, The University of Western Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, 2560, Australia. L.Chipchase@uws.edu.au.
Western Sydney University · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTranscranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is a technique that can be used to assess corticospinal plasticity. Current TMS practices involve the administration of multiple stimuli over target areas of the participant's scalp. However, these procedures require 1 to 2 h per assessment. Decreasing the number of stimuli delivered during TMS assessments would improve time efficiency and decrease participant demand. Thus, the aim of this review is to determine the number of TMS stimuli required to reliably measure (1) corticomotor excitability to a target muscle at a single cranial site and (2) the topography of the primary motor cortical representation for a target muscle across multiple cranial sites (termed 'mapping'). METHODS/

designA systematic review and meta-analysis will be conducted. Electronic databases will be searched using pre-determined search terms to identify relevant studies and evaluate the studies for inclusion and risks of bias. Two independent reviewers will extract the data. Any disagreements will be resolved by a third reviewer. Studies employing single-pulse TMS to measure (1) corticomotor excitability at a single cranial site or (2) the topographic cortical organisation of a target muscle across a number of cranial sites, published before May 2015, will be included if they meet the eligibility criteria. Outcomes will include motor-evoked potential amplitude, map volume, number of active map sites, location of the map centre of gravity, and distance between the centres of gravity of the target muscle and one or more neighbouring muscles. DISCUSSION: To our knowledge, this review will be the first to systematically explore the number of TMS stimuli required to reliably measure both corticomotor excitability and the topography of primary motor cortical representations. This research has the capacity to improve the efficiency of TMS, decrease participant demand, and facilitate the use of TMS as an outcome measurement tool in clinical populations. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42015024579.

Indexed as

Brain MappingMusclesClinical ProtocolsEvoked Potentials, MotorHumansMeta-Analysis as TopicMotor CortexResearch DesignSystematic Reviews as TopicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation

Identifiers

PMID26260518
PMCPMC4531429
OpenAlexW2161549844

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 OpenQuestion graph.