Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35981879›Full record

RevieweNeuro

TMS Does Not Increase BOLD Activity at the Site of Stimulation: A Review of All Concurrent TMS-fMRI Studies.

Farshad Rafiei, Dobromir Rahnev

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in eNeuro. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 38 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. The effects of intermittent theta burst stimulation (iTBS) on resting-state brain entropy (BEN).Neurotherapeutics : the journal of the American Society for Experimental NeuroTherapeutics · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Farshad RafieiSchool of Psychology, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA 30313 farshad@gatech.edu.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9636-4922
Dobromir RahnevSchool of Psychology, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA 30313.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5265-2559
Georgia Institute of Technology · US

Funding

Uncovering the Architecture of MetacognitionR01MH119189 · NIMH · GEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY · PI RAHNEV, DOBROMIR · 2020 to 2024
$1.5M
Improving behavior with TMS: A concurrent TMS-fMRI approachR21MH122825 · NIMH · GEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY · PI RAHNEV, DOBROMIR · 2020 to 2021
$434k
NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH119189NIMH NIH HHS R21 MH122825
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is widely used for understanding brain function in neurologically intact subjects and for the treatment of various disorders. However, the precise neurophysiological effects of TMS at the site of stimulation remain poorly understood. The local effects of TMS can be studied using concurrent TMS-functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), a technique where TMS is delivered during fMRI scanning. However, although concurrent TMS-fMRI was developed over 20 years ago and dozens of studies have used this technique, there is still no consensus on whether TMS increases blood oxygen level-dependent (BOLD) activity at the site of stimulation. To address this question, here we review all previous concurrent TMS-fMRI studies that reported analyses of BOLD activity at the target location. We find evidence that TMS increases local BOLD activity when stimulating the primary motor (M1) and visual (V1) cortices but that these effects are likely driven by the downstream consequences of TMS (finger twitches and phosphenes). However, TMS does not appear to increase BOLD activity at the site of stimulation for areas outside of the M1 and V1 when conducted at rest. We examine the possible reasons for such lack of BOLD signal increase based on recent work in nonhuman animals. We argue that the current evidence points to TMS inducing periods of increased and decreased neuronal firing that mostly cancel each other out and therefore lead to no change in the overall BOLD signal.

Indexed as

Magnetic Resonance ImagingTranscranial Magnetic StimulationBrain MappingCohort StudiesHumansOxygenOxygenBOLDconcurrent TMS-fMRIsingle-neuron recording

Identifiers

PMID35981879
PMCPMC9410768
OpenAlexW4292219806

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.