Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34387388›Full record

ArticleHuman brain mapping2021

Improving the efficacy and reliability of rTMS language mapping by increasing the stimulation frequency.

Charlotte Nettekoven, Julia Pieczewski, Volker Neuschmelting, Kristina Jonas, Roland Goldbrunner, Christian Grefkes, Carolin Weiss Lucas

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Human brain mapping, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Beyond Broca and Wernicke: Epilepsy surgery in the language areas.Epileptic disorders : international epilepsy journal with videotape · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

7 authors.

Charlotte NettekovenFaculty of Medicine and University Hospital, Center for Neurosurgery, Department of General Neurosurgery, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Julia PieczewskiFaculty of Medicine and University Hospital, Center for Neurosurgery, Department of General Neurosurgery, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Volker NeuschmeltingFaculty of Medicine and University Hospital, Center for Neurosurgery, Department of General Neurosurgery, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Kristina JonasFaculty of Human Sciences, Department of Rehabilitation and Special Education, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Roland GoldbrunnerFaculty of Medicine and University Hospital, Center for Neurosurgery, Department of General Neurosurgery, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Christian GrefkesFaculty of Medicine and University Hospital, Department of Neurology, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-1656-720X
Carolin Weiss LucasFaculty of Medicine and University Hospital, Center for Neurosurgery, Department of General Neurosurgery, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-6463-0034

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Repetitive TMS (rTMS) with a frequency of 5-10 Hz is widely used for language mapping. However, it may be accompanied by discomfort and is limited in the number and reliability of evoked language errors. We, here, systematically tested the influence of different stimulation frequencies (i.e., 10, 30, and 50 Hz) on tolerability, number, reliability, and cortical distribution of language errors aiming at improved language mapping. 15 right-handed, healthy subjects (m = 8, median age: 29 yrs) were investigated in two sessions, separated by 2-5 days. In each session, 10, 30, and 50 Hz rTMS were applied over the left hemisphere in a randomized order during a picture naming task. Overall, 30 Hz rTMS evoked significantly more errors (20 ± 12%) compared to 50 Hz (12 ± 8%; p <.01), whereas error rates were comparable between 30/50 and 10 Hz (18 ± 11%). Across all conditions, a significantly higher error rate was found in Session 1 (19 ± 13%) compared to Session 2 (13 ± 7%, p <.05). The error rate was poorly reliable between sessions for 10 (intraclass correlation coefficient, ICC = .315) and 30 Hz (ICC = .427), whereas 50 Hz showed a moderate reliability (ICC = .597). Spatial reliability of language errors was low to moderate with a tendency toward increased reliability for higher frequencies, for example, within frontal regions. Compared to 10 Hz, both, 30 and 50 Hz were rated as less painful. Taken together, our data favor the use of rTMS-protocols employing higher frequencies for evoking language errors reliably and with reduced discomfort, depending on the region of interest.

Indexed as

Brain MappingPsycholinguisticsTranscranial Magnetic StimulationAdultCerebral CortexFemaleHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMalePattern Recognition, VisualReproducibility of ResultsSpeechYoung Adultbrain stimulationerror ratenoninvasivepainpicture namingspeech mappingTMStolerabilityvirtual lesion

Identifiers

PMID34387388
PMCPMC8519874

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.