ArticleBrain sciences2022
Inter-Individual Variability in Motor Output Is Driven by Recruitment Gain in the Corticospinal Tract Rather Than Motor Threshold.
Article in Brain sciences, 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.
- Exploring pain-motor dynamics: preliminary insights through exploration of descending inhibition and corticospinal excitability.Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Long-interval intracortical inhibition is similar in people with and without amyotrophic lateral sclerosis.Brain communications · 2026Article
- Personalized mapping of inhibitory spinal cord circuits in humans via noninvasive neural decoding and in silico modeling.Science advances · 2025Article
- Transcutaneous Spinal Stimulation Modulates Spinal Reflex Circuit Excitability in Persons with Spinal Cord Injury.Biomedicines · 2025Article
- Effects of intermittent theta burst stimulation on upper limb motor recovery in early stroke patients: an fNIRS study.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Article
- Efficacy of High-Definition Transcranial Alternating Current Stimulation (HD-tACS) at the M1 Hotspot Versus C3 Site in Modulating Corticospinal Tract Excitability.Biomedicines · 2024Article
- Predicting interindividual response to theta burst stimulation in the lower limb motor cortex using machine learning.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2024Article
- Pathophysiology and Treatment of Functional Paralysis: Insight from Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation.Brain sciences · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Variability in the response of individuals to various non-invasive brain stimulation protocols is a major problem that limits their potential for clinical applications. Baseline motor-evoked potential (MEP) amplitude is the key predictor of an individual's response to transcranial magnetic stimulation protocols. However, the factors that predict MEP amplitude and its variability remain unclear. In this study, we aimed to identify the input-output curve (IOC) parameters that best predict MEP amplitude and its variability. We analysed IOC data from 75 subjects and built a general linear model (GLM) using the IOC parameters as regressors and MEP amplitude at 120% resting motor threshold (RMT) as the response variable. We bootstrapped the data to estimate variability of IOC parameters and included them in a GLM to identify the significant predictors of MEP amplitude variability. Peak slope, motor threshold, and maximum MEP amplitude of the IOC were significant predictors of MEP amplitude at 120% RMT and its variability was primarily driven by the variability of peak slope and maximum MEP amplitude. Recruitment gain and maximum corticospinal excitability are the key predictors of MEP amplitude and its variability. Inter-individual variability in motor output may be reduced by achieving a uniform IOC slope.
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.