Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37371346›Full record

ArticleBrain sciences2023

Machine Learning-Based Classification to Disentangle EEG Responses to TMS and Auditory Input.

Andrea Cristofari, Marianna De Santis, Stefano Lucidi, John Rothwell, Elias P Casula, Lorenzo Rocchi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Brain sciences, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Clinical utility and prospective of TMS-EEG: Updated review from an international expert group.Clinical neurophysiology : official journal of the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
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

6 authors.

Andrea CristofariDepartment of Civil Engineering and Computer Science Engineering, "Tor Vergata" University of Rome, 00133 Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-9126-3994
Marianna De SantisDepartment of Computer, Automatic and Management Engineering, "Sapienza" University of Rome, 00185 Rome, Italy.
Stefano LucidiDepartment of Computer, Automatic and Management Engineering, "Sapienza" University of Rome, 00185 Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-4356-7958
John RothwellDepartment of Clinical and Movement Neurosciences, UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology, University College London, London WC1N 3BG, UK.
Elias P CasulaDepartment of System Medicine, "Tor Vergata" University of Rome, 00133 Rome, Italy.
Lorenzo RocchiDepartment of Clinical and Movement Neurosciences, UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology, University College London, London WC1N 3BG, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-3979-156X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The combination of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) and electroencephalography (EEG) offers an unparalleled opportunity to study cortical physiology by characterizing brain electrical responses to external perturbation, called transcranial-evoked potentials (TEPs). Although these reflect cortical post-synaptic potentials, they can be contaminated by auditory evoked potentials (AEPs) due to the TMS click, which partly show a similar spatial and temporal scalp distribution. Therefore, TEPs and AEPs can be difficult to disentangle by common statistical methods, especially in conditions of suboptimal AEP suppression. In this work, we explored the ability of machine learning algorithms to distinguish TEPs recorded with masking of the TMS click, AEPs and non-masked TEPs in a sample of healthy subjects. Overall, our classifier provided reliable results at the single-subject level, even for signals where differences were not shown in previous works. Classification accuracy (CA) was lower at the group level, when different subjects were used for training and test phases, and when three stimulation conditions instead of two were compared. Lastly, CA was higher when average, rather than single-trial TEPs, were used. In conclusion, this proof-of-concept study proposes machine learning as a promising tool to separate pure TEPs from those contaminated by sensory input.

Indexed as

electroencephalographyevoked potentialsmachine learningneural networksTMS-EEGtranscranial magnetic stimulation

Identifiers

PMID37371346
PMCPMC10296660

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.