ArticleFrontiers in neuroscience2020
Predicting Long-Term After-Effects of Theta-Burst Stimulation on Supplementary Motor Network Through One-Session Response.
Article in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2020. 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A systematic review of the neurobiological effects of theta-burst stimulation (TBS) as measured using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI).Brain structure & function · 2023Pooled it
- Pre-supplementary motor network connectivity and clinical outcome of magnetic stimulation in obsessive-compulsive disorder.Human brain mapping · 2021Trial
- Mapping shared and specific cortical after-effects of repetitive TMS on brain function.BMC medicine · 2026Article
- Brain functional specialization and cooperation in Parkinson's disease.Brain imaging and behavior · 2022Article
- Intermittent Theta Burst Stimulation (iTBS) as an Optimal Treatment for Schizophrenia Risk Decision: an ERSP Study.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To understand the neural mechanism of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), the after-effects following one session or multiple days of stimulation have been widely investigated. However, the relation between the short-term effect (STE) and long-term effect (LTE) of rTMS is largely unknown. This study aims to explore whether the after-effects of 5-day rTMS on supplementary motor area (SMA) network could be predicted by one-session response. A primary cohort of 38 healthy participants underwent five daily sessions of real or sham continuous theta-burst stimulation (cTBS) on the left SMA. Resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) data were acquired at the first (before and after the first stimulation) and sixth experimental day. The SMA connectivity changes after the first cTBS and after 5 days of stimulation were defined as STE and LTE, respectively. Compared to the baseline, significant STE and LTE were found in the bilateral paracentral gyrus (ParaCG) after real stimulation, suggesting shared neural correlates of short- and long-term stimulations. Region-of-interest analysis indicated that the resting-state functional connectivity between SMA and ParaCG increased after real stimulation, while no significant change was found after sham stimulation. Leave-one-out cross-validation indicated that the LTE in ParaCG could be predicted by the STE after real but not sham stimulations. In an independent cohort, the after-effects of rTMS on ParaCG and short- to long-term prediction were reproduced at the region-of-interest level. These imaging evidences indicate that one-session rTMS can aid to predict the regions responsive to long-term stimulation and the individualized response degree.
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.