ArticleFrontiers in human neuroscience2016
A Double-Coil TMS Method to Assess Corticospinal Excitability Changes at a Near-Simultaneous Time in the Two Hands during Movement Preparation.
Article in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.
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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 38 citations in OpenAlex.
- Relationship between transcranial magnetic stimulation markers of motor control and clinical recovery in obsessive compulsive disorder/Gilles de la Tourette syndrome: a proof of concept case study.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2024Article
- Investigating the role of contextual cues and interhemispheric inhibitory mechanisms in response-selective stopping: a TMS study.Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience · 2023Article
- Action Selection and Motor Decision Making: Insights from Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation.Brain sciences · 2022Review
- Long-TermFrontiers in neurology · 2021Article
- Considering Motor Excitability During Action Preparation in Gambling Disorder: A Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Study.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2020Article
- A TMS study of preparatory suppression in binge drinkers.NeuroImage. Clinical · 2020Article
- Planning face, hand, and leg movements: anatomical constraints on preparatory inhibition.Journal of neurophysiology · 2019Article
- The supplementary motor area modulates interhemispheric interactions during movement preparation.Human brain mapping · 2019Article
- Deficient inhibition in alcohol-dependence: let's consider the role of the motor system!Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2018Article
- Using a Double-Coil TMS Protocol to Assess Preparatory Inhibition Bilaterally.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2018Article
- Physiological Markers of Motor Inhibition during Human Behavior.Trends in neurosciences · 2017Review
- Effect of Aging on Motor Inhibition during Action Preparation under Sensory Conflict.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2016Article
- Comparison of Motor Inhibition in Variants of the Instructed-Delay Choice Reaction Time Task.PloS one · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMany previous transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) studies have investigated corticospinal excitability changes occurring when choosing which hand to use for an action, one of the most frequent decision people make in daily life. So far, these studies have applied single-pulse TMS eliciting motor-evoked potential (MEP) in one hand when this hand is either selected or non-selected. Using such method, hand choices were shown to entail the operation of two inhibitory mechanisms, suppressing MEPs in the targeted hand either when it is non-selected (competition resolution, CR) or selected (impulse control, IC). However, an important limitation of this "Single-Coil" method is that MEPs are elicited in selected and non-selected conditions during separate trials and thus those two settings may not be completely comparable. Moreover, a more important problem is that MEPs are computed in relation to the movement of different hands. The goal of the present study was to test a "Double-Coil" method to evaluate IC and CR preceding the same hand responses by applying Double-Coil TMS over the two primary motor cortices (M1) at a near-simultaneous time (1 ms inter-pulse interval).
methodsMEPs were obtained in the left (MEPLEFT) and right (MEPRIGHT) hands while subjects chose between left and right hand key-presses in blocks using a Single-Coil or a Double-Coil method; in the latter blocks, TMS was either applied over left M1 first (TMSLRM1 group, n = 12) or right M1 first (TMSRLM1 group, n = 12).
resultsMEPLEFT were suppressed preceding both left (IC) and right (CR) hand responses whereas MEPRIGHT were only suppressed preceding left (CR) but not right (IC) hand responses. This result was observed regardless of whether Single-Coil or Double-Coil TMS was applied in the two subject groups. However, in the TMSLRM1 group, the MEP suppression was attenuated in Double-Coil compared to Single-Coil blocks for both IC and CR, when probed with MEPLEFT (elicited by the second pulse).
conclusionsAlthough Double-Coil TMS may be a reliable method to assess bilateral motor excitability provided that a RM1-LM1 pulse order is used, further experiments are required to understand the reduced MEPLEFT changes in Double-Coil blocks when the LM1-RM1 pulse order was used.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.