Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36138954›Full record

ReviewBrain sciences2022

Devices and Technology in Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation: A Systematic Review.

Mario Ibrahin Gutierrez, Irais Poblete-Naredo, Jorge Airy Mercado-Gutierrez, Cinthya Lourdes Toledo-Peral, Jimena Quinzaños-Fresnedo, Oscar Yanez-Suarez, Josefina Gutierrez-Martinez

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Brain sciences, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Multimodal Neural Assessment for Predicting Post-Stroke Dysphagia: Identifying Critical Risk Factors Using Combined Indicators.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  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.

Mario Ibrahin GutierrezSubdirección de Investigación Tecnológica, División de Investigación en Ingeniería Médica, CONACYT -Instituto Nacional de Rehabilitación LGII, Mexico City 14389, Mexico.ORCID 0000-0001-8113-5932
Irais Poblete-NaredoDepartamento de Toxicología, Cinvestav-IPN, Mexico City 07360, Mexico.ORCID 0000-0003-4742-2238
Jorge Airy Mercado-GutierrezSubdirección de Investigación Tecnológica, División de Investigación en Ingeniería Médica, Instituto Nacional de Rehabilitación LGII, Mexico City 14389, Mexico.ORCID 0000-0002-2304-0449
Cinthya Lourdes Toledo-PeralSubdirección de Investigación Tecnológica, División de Investigación en Ingeniería Médica, Instituto Nacional de Rehabilitación LGII, Mexico City 14389, Mexico.ORCID 0000-0003-0522-1155
Jimena Quinzaños-FresnedoDivisión de Rehabilitación Neurológica, Instituto Nacional de Rehabilitación LGII, Mexico City 14389, Mexico.ORCID 0000-0002-2780-6878
Oscar Yanez-SuarezNeuroimaging Research Laboratory, Electrical Engineering Department, Universidad Autonoma Metropolitana Unidad Iztapalapa, Mexico City 14389, Mexico.ORCID 0000-0002-4249-8877
Josefina Gutierrez-MartinezSubdirección de Investigación Tecnológica, División de Investigación en Ingeniería Médica, Instituto Nacional de Rehabilitación LGII, Mexico City 14389, Mexico.ORCID 0000-0002-4047-4257

Funding

Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología CB2015-02-257966Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología FOP16-2021-01-319246
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The technology for transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) has significantly changed over the years, with important improvements in the signal generators, the coils, the positioning systems, and the software for modeling, optimization, and therapy planning. In this systematic literature review (SLR), the evolution of each component of TMS technology is presented and analyzed to assess the limitations to overcome. This SLR was carried out following the PRISMA 2020 statement. Published articles of TMS were searched for in four databases (Web of Science, PubMed, Scopus, IEEE). Conference papers and other reviews were excluded. Records were filtered using terms about TMS technology with a semi-automatic software; articles that did not present new technology developments were excluded manually. After this screening, 101 records were included, with 19 articles proposing new stimulator designs (18.8%), 46 presenting or adapting coils (45.5%), 18 proposing systems for coil placement (17.8%), and 43 implementing algorithms for coil optimization (42.6%). The articles were blindly classified by the authors to reduce the risk of bias. However, our results could have been influenced by our research interests, which would affect conclusions for applications in psychiatric and neurological diseases. Our analysis indicates that more emphasis should be placed on optimizing the current technology with a special focus on the experimental validation of models. With this review, we expect to establish the base for future TMS technological developments.

Indexed as

TMS coilTMS devicesTMS modelingTMS stimulatorTMS technologytranscranial magnetic stimulation

Identifiers

PMID36138954
PMCPMC9496961

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.