Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32375172›Full record

ArticleBrain : a journal of neurology2020

Brain responsivity provides an individual readout for motor recovery after stroke.

Caroline Tscherpel, Sebastian Dern, Lukas Hensel, Ulf Ziemann, Gereon R Fink, Christian Grefkes

Registry-linked trialOpen access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Brain : a journal of neurology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04688970 (Personalized Neurorehabilitative Precision Medicine - From Data to Therapies), which is not on this map. Cited by 47 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
47citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
4.9field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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.

NCT04688970 unknown statusnot on this map

Personalized Neurorehabilitative Precision Medicine - From Data to Therapies

TypeobservationalSponsorUniversity Hospital TuebingenRan2020 to 2022Enrolled500ConditionsStroke, Acute, Outcome, Improvement, Rehabilitation, Upper Extremity ParesisArmsno intervention
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

47 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 119 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Review
  10. Covert brain complexity in the intensive care unit.Cortex; a journal devoted to the study of the nervous system and behavior · 2026
    Article
  11. Clinical utility and prospective of TMS-EEG: Updated review from an international expert group.Clinical neurophysiology : official journal of the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2026
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Mechanisms of acupuncture-regulated cortical plasticity after stroke based on TMS-EEG-MEP integration.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2026
    Article
  14. Observational
  15. Review
  16. Criticality and increased intrinsic neural timescales in stroke.NPJ systems biology and applications · 2025
    Article
  17. Brain Oscillatory Modes as a Proxy of Stroke Recovery.Neurorehabilitation and neural repair · 2025
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Caroline TscherpelMedical Faculty, University of Cologne, and Department of Neurology, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Sebastian DernMedical Faculty, University of Cologne, and Department of Neurology, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Lukas HenselMedical Faculty, University of Cologne, and Department of Neurology, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Ulf ZiemannDepartment of Neurology and Stroke, and Hertie Institute for Clinical Brain Research, Eberhard-Karls-University Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.
Gereon R FinkMedical Faculty, University of Cologne, and Department of Neurology, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Christian GrefkesMedical Faculty, University of Cologne, and Department of Neurology, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
University of Cologne · DEHertie Institute for Clinical Brain Research · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Promoting the recovery of motor function and optimizing rehabilitation strategies for stroke patients is closely associated with the challenge of individual prediction. To date, stroke research has identified critical pathophysiological neural underpinnings at the cellular level as well as with regard to network reorganization. However, in order to generate reliable readouts at the level of individual patients and thereby realize translation from bench to bedside, we are still in a need for innovative methods. The combined use of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) and EEG has proven powerful to record both local and network responses at an individual's level. To elucidate the potential of TMS-EEG to assess motor recovery after stroke, we used neuronavigated TMS-EEG over ipsilesional primary motor cortex (M1) in 28 stroke patients in the first days after stroke. Twenty-five of these patients were reassessed after >3 months post-stroke. In the early post-stroke phase (6.7 ± 2.5 days), the TMS-evoked EEG responses featured two markedly different response morphologies upon TMS to ipsilesional M1. In the first group of patients, TMS elicited a differentiated and sustained EEG response with a series of deflections sequentially involving both hemispheres. This response type resembled the patterns of bilateral activation as observed in the healthy comparison group. By contrast, in a subgroup of severely affected patients, TMS evoked a slow and simplified local response. Quantifying the TMS-EEG responses in the time and time-frequency domain revealed that stroke patients exhibited slower and simple responses with higher amplitudes compared to healthy controls. Importantly, these patterns of activity changes after stroke were not only linked to the initial motor deficit, but also to motor recovery after >3 months post-stroke. Thus, the data revealed a substantial impairment of local effects as well as causal interactions within the motor network early after stroke. Additionally, for severely affected patients with absent motor evoked potentials and identical clinical phenotype, TMS-EEG provided differential response patterns indicative of the individual potential for recovery of function. Thereby, TMS-EEG extends the methodological repertoire in stroke research by allowing the assessment of individual response profiles.

Indexed as

AgedAged, 80 and overBrainElectroencephalographyEvoked Potentials, MotorFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedMotor CortexNeuronal PlasticityStrokeStroke RehabilitationTranscranial Magnetic Stimulationneurorehabilitationplasticityslow wavesTMS-EEG

Identifiers

PMID32375172
PMCPMC7296846
OpenAlexW3023156586

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

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.