ArticleFrontiers in neurology2017
Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation with Intermittent Theta Burst Stimulation Alters Corticospinal Output in Patients with Chronic Incomplete Spinal Cord Injury.
Article in Frontiers in neurology, 2017. 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, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of High-Definition Cathodal tDCS Preconditioning on Enhancing the Therapeutic Efficacy of iTBS Combined With FES for Improving Walking Function in Patients With Spinal Cord Injury: A Randomized Controlled Trial.CNS neuroscience & therapeutics · 2026Trial
- Intermittent theta burst stimulation modulates biceps brachii corticomotor excitability in individuals with tetraplegia.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2022Trial
- Intermittent theta burst stimulation enhances upper limb motor function in patients with chronic stroke: a pilot randomized controlled trial.BMC neurology · 2019Trial
- Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation is associated with improved functional recovery and time-dependent changes in apoptosis-related execution-phase markers after spinal cord injury.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- TMS-Indexed neurophysiological signatures of neural compensation in spinal cord injury: associations with injury level, motor function, and affective modulation.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2025Article
- Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation for the Treatment of Spinal Cord Injury: Current Status and Perspective.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Global research hotspots and trends of theta burst stimulation from 2004 to 2023: a bibliometric analysis.Frontiers in neurology · 2024Article
- The Effects of Exercise on Synaptic Plasticity in Individuals With Mild Cognitive Impairment: Protocol for a Pilot Intervention Study.JMIR research protocols · 2023Article
- Effect of neuroanatomy on corticomotor excitability during and after transcranial magnetic stimulation and intermittent theta burst stimulation.Human brain mapping · 2022Article
- Article
- The effects of individualised intermittent theta burst stimulation in the prefrontal cortex: A TMS-EEG study.Human brain mapping · 2019Article
- Priming With Intermittent Theta Burst Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Promotes Spinal Plasticity Induced by Peripheral Patterned Electrical Stimulation.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2018Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Intermittent theta burst stimulation (iTBS) is intended primarily to alter corticospinal excitability, creating an attractive opportunity to alter neural output following incomplete spinal cord injury (SCI). This study is the first to assess the effects of iTBS in SCI. Eight individuals with chronic incomplete SCI were studied. Sham or real iTBS was delivered (to each participant) over primary motor and somatosensory cortices in separate sessions. Motor-evoked potential (MEP) recruitment curves were obtained from the flexor carpi radialis muscle before and after iTBS. Results indicate similar responses for iTBS to both motor and somatosensory cortex and reduced MEPs in 56.25% and increased MEPs in 25% of instances. Sham stimulation exceeded real iTBS effects in the remaining 18.25%. It is our opinion that observing short-term neuroplasticity in corticospinal output in chronic SCI is an important advance and should be tested in future studies as an opportunity to improve function in this population. We emphasize the need to re-consider the importance of the direction of MEP change following a single session of iTBS since the relationship between MEP direction and motor function is unknown and multiple sessions of iTBS may yield very different directional results. Furthermore, we highlight the importance of including sham control in the experimental design. The fundamental point from this pilot research is that a single session of iTBS is often capable of creating short-term change in SCI. Future sham-controlled randomized trials may consider repeat iTBS sessions to promote long-term changes in corticospinal excitability.
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.