Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29096197›Full record

Trial reportCortex; a journal devoted to the study of the nervous system and behavior2017

Motor cortex inhibition by TMS reduces cognitive non-motor procedural learning when immediate incentives are present.

Leonora Wilkinson, Philip J Koshy, Adam Steel, Devin Bageac, Selene Schintu, Eric M Wassermann

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Cortex; a journal devoted to the study of the nervous system and behavior, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

6 authors.

Leonora WilkinsonBehavioral Neurology Unit, National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, National Institutes of Health, USA. Electronic address: Leonora.Wilkinson@nih.gov.
Philip J KoshyBehavioral Neurology Unit, National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, National Institutes of Health, USA. Electronic address: philip.koshy@nih.gov.
Adam SteelBehavioral Neurology Unit, National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, National Institutes of Health, USA. Electronic address: adam.steel@nih.gov.
Devin BageacBehavioral Neurology Unit, National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, National Institutes of Health, USA. Electronic address: devin.bageac@nih.gov.
Selene SchintuBehavioral Neurology Unit, National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, National Institutes of Health, USA. Electronic address: selene.schintu2@nih.gov.
Eric M WassermannBehavioral Neurology Unit, National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, National Institutes of Health, USA. Electronic address: wassermanne@ninds.nih.gov.

Funding

Electrophysiological Probes And Treatments In Neurobehavioral DisordersZIANS002977 · NINDS · NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF NEUROLOGICAL DISORDERS AND STROKE · PI WASSERMANN, ERIC M · 2009 to 2025
$14.6M
Intramural NIH HHS Z99 NS999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Inhibitory repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) of the primary motor area (M1) impairs motor sequence-learning, but not basic motor function. It is unknown if this is specific for motor forms of procedural learning or a more general effect. To investigate, we tested the effect of M1-inhibition on the weather prediction task (WPT), a learning task with minimal motor learning component. In the WPT, participants learn arbitrary, probabilistic, associations between sets of meaningless cues and fictional outcomes. In our "Feedback" (FB) condition, they received monetary rewards/punishments during learning. In the "paired associate" (PA) condition they learned the same information by passive observation of associations. The observational and feedback learning conditions were matched for their non-learning-specific motor demands. In each of two FB or PA sessions, we delivered Real (inhibitory) or Sham continuous theta-burst (cTBS) to the left-M1, before 150 training-trials. We then tested learning with 42 trials without feedback immediately after learning and again 1-h after cTBS. Compared to Sham, Real cTBS reduced performance during FB-learning, when learning was immediately reinforced, but not when knowledge was tested after PA learning. Furthermore, when FB-based memory was tested after learning without immediate incentive, there was no effect of TMS compared to post-PA test performance, showing the TMS effect operated only in the presence of incentive and feedback. We conclude that M1 is a node in a network underlying feedback-driven procedural learning and inhibitory rTMS there results in decreased network efficiency.

Indexed as

RewardTranscranial Magnetic StimulationAdolescentAdultCognitionEvoked Potentials, MotorFemaleHumansLearningMaleMiddle AgedMotivationMotor CortexNeural InhibitionNeuropsychological TestsYoung AdultContinuous theta burst stimulationFeedbackMotor cortexProbabilistic classification learning and weather prediction task

Identifiers

PMID29096197
PMCPMC5716846

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.