Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36275924›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in rehabilitation sciences2022

Utility of transcranial magnetic stimulation in the assessment of spinal cord injury: Current status and future directions.

Tarun Arora, Naaz Desai, Steven Kirshblum, Robert Chen

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
2.9field-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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Effects of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation on motor ability, neurophysiological changes, mental health, and activities of daily living in spinal cord injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. 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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Tarun AroraKrembil Research Institute, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Naaz DesaiKrembil Research Institute, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Steven KirshblumDepartment of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, Newark, NJ, United States.
Robert ChenKrembil Research Institute, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Krembil Research InstituteKessler Foundation · USUniversity Health Network · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Comprehensive assessment following traumatic spinal cord injury (SCI) is needed to improve prognostication, advance the understanding of the neurophysiology and better targeting of clinical interventions. The International Standards for Neurological Classification of Spinal Cord Injury is the most common clinical examination recommended for use after a SCI. In addition, there are over 30 clinical assessment tools spanning across different domains of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health that have been validated and recommended for use in SCI. Most of these tools are subjective in nature, have limited value in predicting neurologic recovery, and do not provide insights into neurophysiological mechanisms. Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is a non-invasive neurophysiology technique that can supplement the clinical assessment in the domain of body structure and function during acute and chronic stages of SCI. TMS offers a better insight into neurophysiology and help in better detection of residual corticomotor connectivity following SCI compared to clinical assessment alone. TMS-based motor evoked potential and silent period duration allow study of excitatory and inhibitory mechanisms following SCI. Changes in muscle representations in form of displacement of TMS-based motor map center of gravity or changes in the map area can capture neuroplastic changes resulting from SCI or following rehabilitation. Paired-pulse TMS measures help understand the compensatory reorganization of the cortical circuits following SCI. In combination with peripheral stimulation, TMS can be used to study central motor conduction time and modulation of spinal reflexes, which can be used for advanced diagnostic and treatment purposes. To strengthen the utility of TMS in SCI assessment, future studies will need to standardize the assessment protocols, address population-specific concerns, and establish the psychometric properties of TMS-based measurements in the SCI population.

Indexed as

clinical assessmentinternational standards for neurological classification of spinal cord injuryneurophysiology assessmentspinal cord injurytranscranial magnetic stimulation

Identifiers

PMID36275924
PMCPMC9581184
OpenAlexW4301430671

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.