ArticleFrontiers in neuroscience2020
Cerebellar Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation and Noisy Galvanic Vestibular Stimulation Change Vestibulospinal Function.
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 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, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Target Interpretability and Functional Mapping of rTMS and Theta-Burst Stimulation of the Cerebellar Vermis and Midline Cerebellum: A Scoping Review.Cerebellum (London, England) · 2026Article
- Standardizing Stimulus Parameters for Noisy Galvanic Vestibular Stimulation.Journal of audiology & otology · 2026Review
- The Relationship Between Soleus H-Reflex Following Standing GVS and Postural Control Responses on Firm and Foam Surfaces: An Exploratory Study.Brain sciences · 2025Article
- Effects of cerebellar transcranial direct current stimulation on the excitability of spinal motor neurons and vestibulospinal tract in healthy individuals.Experimental brain research · 2024Article
- Changes in vestibular-related responses to combined noisy galvanic vestibular stimulation and cerebellar transcranial direct current stimulation.Experimental brain research · 2024Article
- Moving toward elucidating alternative motor pathway structures post-stroke: the value of spinal cord neuroimaging.Frontiers in neurology · 2024Review
- Relationships between changes in lateral vestibulospinal tract excitability and postural control by dynamic balance intervention in healthy individuals: A preliminary study.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2023Article
- Post-activation depression of the Hoffman reflex is not altered by galvanic vestibular stimulation in healthy subjects.Frontiers in integrative neuroscience · 2023Article
- Effects of Noisy Galvanic Vestibular Stimulation on the Muscle Activity and Joint Movements in Different Standing Postures Conditions.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2022Article
- Phase-dependent modulation of the vestibular-cerebellar networkFrontiers in neuroscience · 2022Article
- Vestibulo-Ocular Reflex Is Modulated by Noisy Galvanic Vestibular Stimulation.Frontiers in neurology · 2022Article
- No Impact of Stochastic Galvanic Vestibular Stimulation on Arterial Pressure and Heart Rate Variability in the Elderly Population.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2021Article
- The Effects of Stochastic Galvanic Vestibular Stimulation on Body Sway and Muscle Activity.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe cerebellum strongly contributes to vestibulospinal function, and the modulation of vestibulospinal function is important for rehabilitation. As transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) and electrical stimulation may induce functional changes in neural systems, we investigated whether cerebellar repetitive TMS (crTMS) and noisy galvanic vestibular stimulation (nGVS) could modulate vestibulospinal response excitability. We also sought to determine whether crTMS could influence the effect of nGVS.
methodsFifty-nine healthy adults were recruited; 28 were randomly allocated to a real-crTMS group and 31 to a sham-crTMS group. The crTMS was conducted using 900 pulses at 1 Hz, while the participants were in a static position. After the crTMS, each participant was allocated to either a real-nGVS group or sham-nGVS group, and nGVS was delivered (15 min., 1 mA; 0.1-640 Hz) while patients were in a static position. The H-reflex ratio (with/without bilateral bipolar square wave pulse GVS), which reflects vestibulospinal excitability, was measured at pre-crTMS, post-crTMS, and post-nGVS.
resultsWe found that crTMS alone and nGVS alone have no effect on H-reflex ratio but that the effect of nGVS was obtained after crTMS.
conclusioncrTMS and nGVS appear to act as neuromodulators of vestibulospinal function.
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.