ArticleNeural regeneration research2022
Effects of paired associative magnetic stimulation between nerve root and cortex on motor function of lower limbs after spinal cord injury: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.
Article in Neural regeneration research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Repetitive peripheral magnetic stimulation combined with transcranial magnetic stimulation in rehabilitation of upper extremity hemiparesis following stroke: a pilot study.Journal of rehabilitation medicine · 2024Trial
- Magnetically Responsive Piezoelectric Nanocapacitors Enhance Neural Recovery Following Spinal Cord Injury via Targeted Spinal Magnetic Stimulation.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026Article
- Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation for the Treatment of Spinal Cord Injury: Current Status and Perspective.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- nTMS in spinal cord injury: Current evidence, challenges and a future direction.Brain & spine · 2025Review
- Visualizing Wallerian degeneration in the corticospinal tract after sensorimotor cortex ischemia in mice.Neural regeneration research · 2024Article
- The effects of combined high-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation and cervical nerve root magnetic stimulation on upper extremity motor recovery following stroke.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2023Article
- Research progress on the application of transcranial magnetic stimulation in spinal cord injury rehabilitation: a narrative review.Frontiers in neurology · 2023Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Classic paired associative stimulation can improve synaptic plasticity, as demonstrated by animal experiments and human clinical trials in spinal cord injury patients. Paired associative magnetic stimulation (dual-target peripheral and central magnetic stimulation) has been shown to promote neurologic recovery after stroke. However, it remains unclear whether paired associative magnetic stimulation can promote recovery of lower limb motor dysfunction after spinal cord injury. We hypothesize that the current caused by central and peripheral magnetic stimulation will converge at the synapse, which will promote synapse function and improve the motor function of the relevant muscles. Therefore, this study aimed to examine the effects of paired associative magnetic stimulation on neural circuit activation by measuring changes in motor evoked and somatosensory evoked potentials, motor and sensory function of the lower limbs, functional health and activities of daily living, and depression in patients with spinal cord injury. We will recruit 110 thoracic spinal trauma patients treated in the Department of Spinal Cord Injury, China Rehabilitation Hospital and randomly assign them to experimental and control groups in a 1:1 ratio. The trial group (n = 55) will be treated with paired associative magnetic stimulation and conventional rehabilitation treatment. The control group (n = 55) will be treated with sham stimulation and conventional rehabilitation treatment. Outcomes will be measured at four time points: baseline and 4, 12, and 24 weeks after the start of intervention (active or sham paired associative magnetic stimulation). The primary outcome measure of this trial is change in lower limb American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale motor function score from baseline to last follow-up. Secondary outcome measures include changes in lower limb American Spinal Injury Association sensory function score, motor evoked potentials, sensory evoked potentials, modified Ashworth scale score, Maslach Burnout Inventory score, and Hamilton Depression Scale score over time. Motor evoked potential latency reflects corticospinal tract transmission time, while amplitude reflects recruitment ability; both measures can help elucidate the mechanism underlying the effect of paired associative magnetic stimulation on synaptic efficiency. Adverse events will be recorded. Findings from this trial will help to indicate whether paired associative magnetic stimulation (1) promotes recovery of lower limb sensory and motor function, reduces spasticity, and improves quality of life; (2) promotes neurologic recovery by increasing excitability of spinal cord motor neurons and stimulating synaptic plasticity; and (3) improves rehabilitation outcome in patients with spinal cord injury. Recruitment for this trial began in April 2021 and is currently ongoing. It was approved by the Ethics Committee of Yangzhi Affiliated Rehabilitation Hospital of Tongji University, China (approval No. YZ2020-018) on May 18, 2020. The study protocol was registered in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (registration number: ChiCTR2100044794) on March 27, 2021 (protocol version 1.0). This trial will be completed in April 2022.
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.