Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34834410›Full record

ArticleJournal of personalized medicine2021

Development of an Advanced Sham Coil for Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation and Examination of Its Specifications.

Mayuko Takano, Jiri Havlicek, Dan Phillips, Shinichiro Nakajima, Masaru Mimura, Yoshihiro Noda

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of personalized medicine, 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. Trial
  2. 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
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
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

6 authors.

Mayuko TakanoDepartment of Neuropsychiatry, Keio University School of Medicine, Tokyo 160-8582, Japan.
Jiri HavlicekDEYMED Diagnostic s.r.o., 54931 Hronov, Czech Republic.
Dan PhillipsBrainbox Ltd., Cardiff CF10 1AF, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-3252-4602
Shinichiro NakajimaDepartment of Neuropsychiatry, Keio University School of Medicine, Tokyo 160-8582, Japan.
Masaru MimuraDepartment of Neuropsychiatry, Keio University School of Medicine, Tokyo 160-8582, Japan.
Yoshihiro NodaDepartment of Neuropsychiatry, Keio University School of Medicine, Tokyo 160-8582, Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-2155-0357

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) neurophysiology has been widely applied worldwide, but it is often contaminated by confounders other than cortical stimulus-evoked activities. Although advanced sham coils that elaborately mimic active stimulation have recently been developed, their performance is not examined in detail. Developing such sham coils is crucial to improve the accuracy of TMS neurophysiology. Herein, we examined the specifications of the sham coil by comparison with the active coil. The magnetic flux and click sound pressure changes were measured when the stimulus intensity was varied from 10% to 100% maximum stimulator output (MSO), and the changes in coil surface temperature over time with continuous stimulation at 50% MSO for each coil. The magnetic flux change at the center of the coil showed a peak of 12.51 (kT/s) for the active coil, whereas it was 0.41 (kT/s) for the sham coil. Although both coils showed a linear change in magnetic flux as the stimulus intensity increased, due to the difference in coil winding structure, the sham coil took less than half the time to overheat and had 5 dB louder coil click sounds than the active coil. The sham coil showed a sufficiently small flux change at the center of the coil, but the flux change from the periphery of the coil was comparable to that of the active coil. Future use of high-quality sham coil will extend our understanding of the TMS neurophysiology of the cortex at the stimulation site.

Indexed as

figure-of-eight coilmagnetic fluxmonophasic stimulationsham coiltranscranial magnetic stimulation (TMS)

Identifiers

PMID34834410
PMCPMC8617996

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.