ArticlePloS one2020
The impact of TMS and PNS frequencies on MEP potentiation in PAS with high-frequency peripheral component.
Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Paired associative stimulation with a high-intensity cortical component and a high-frequency peripheral component in treatment of neuropathic pain after incomplete spinal cord injury - a pilot trial.Spinal cord series and cases · 2026Trial
- Paired associative stimulation improves outcomes when applied at the subacute stage after incomplete cervical spinal cord injury.Neurotherapeutics : the journal of the American Society for Experimental NeuroTherapeutics · 2026Trial
- Improving hand function in chronic incomplete tetraplegia by high-PAS intervention with alternative equipment: a case report.Spinal cord series and cases · 2026Article
- Stable improvement in hand muscle strength in incomplete spinal cord injury patients by long-term paired associative stimulation-a case series study.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Article
- Spinally targeted paired associated stimulation with high-frequency peripheral component induces spinal level plasticity in healthy subjects.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- The effects of music combined to paired associative stimulation on motor-evoked potentials and alertness in spinal cord injury patients and healthy subjects.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- The effect of paired associative stimulation with a high-intensity cortical component and a high-frequency peripheral component on heart rate and heart rate variability in healthy subjects.Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences · 2023Article
- Optimal peripheral nerve stimulation intensity for paired associative stimulation with high-frequency peripheral component in healthy subjects.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- A New Paired Associative Stimulation Protocol with High-Frequency Peripheral Component and High-Intensity 20 Hz Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation-A Pilot Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Omitting TMS component from paired associative stimulation with high-frequency PNS: A case series of tetraplegic patients.Clinical neurophysiology practice · 2021Article
- The Immediate and Short-Term Effects of Transcutaneous Spinal Cord Stimulation and Peripheral Nerve Stimulation on Corticospinal Excitability.Frontiers in neuroscience · 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
6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Paired associative stimulation (PAS) combines transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) and peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS) to induce plastic changes in the corticospinal tract. PAS employing single 0.2-Hz TMS pulses synchronized with the first pulse of 50-100 Hz PNS trains potentiates motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) in a stable manner in healthy participants and enhances voluntary motor output in spinal cord injury (SCI) patients. We further investigated the impact of settings of this PAS variant on MEP potentiation in healthy subjects. In experiment 1, we compared 0.2-Hz vs 0.4-Hz PAS. In experiment 2, PNS frequencies of 100 Hz, 200 Hz, and 400 Hz were compared. In experiment 3, we added a second TMS pulse. When compared with 0.4-Hz PAS, 0.2-Hz PAS was significantly more effective after 30 minutes (p = 0.05) and 60 minutes (p = 0.014). MEP potentiation by PAS with 100-Hz and 200-Hz PNS did not differ. PAS with 400-Hz PNS was less effective than 100-Hz (p = 0.023) and 200-Hz (p = 0.013) PNS. Adding an extra TMS pulse rendered PAS strongly inhibitory. These negative findings demonstrate that the 0.2-Hz PAS with 100-Hz PNS previously used in clinical studies is optimal and the modifications employed here do not enhance its efficacy.
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.