Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37966464›Full record

ArticleeLife2023

Combined transcranial magnetic stimulation and electroencephalography reveals alterations in cortical excitability during pain.

Nahian Shahmat Chowdhury, Alan K I Chiang, Samantha K Millard, Patrick Skippen, Wei-Ju Chang, David A Seminowicz, Siobhan M Schabrun

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in eLife, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 29% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Modulation of evoked alpha oscillatory activity in the frontocentral region during analgesia by non-invasive brain stimulation.Neurotherapeutics : the journal of the American Society for Experimental NeuroTherapeutics · 2026
    Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. 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
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Nahian Shahmat ChowdhuryCenter for Pain IMPACT, Neuroscience Research Australia, Sydney, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-6357-0746
Alan K I ChiangCenter for Pain IMPACT, Neuroscience Research Australia, Sydney, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-9156-0534
Samantha K MillardCenter for Pain IMPACT, Neuroscience Research Australia, Sydney, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-1409-8179
Patrick SkippenCenter for Pain IMPACT, Neuroscience Research Australia, Sydney, Australia.
Wei-Ju ChangCenter for Pain IMPACT, Neuroscience Research Australia, Sydney, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-0524-4883
David A SeminowiczCenter for Pain IMPACT, Neuroscience Research Australia, Sydney, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-3111-3756
Siobhan M SchabrunCenter for Pain IMPACT, Neuroscience Research Australia, Sydney, Australia.
UNSW Sydney · AUWestern University · CANeuroscience Research Australia · AUUniversity of Newcastle Australia · AU

Funding

Validation of a novel cortical biomarker signature for painR61NS113269 · NINDS · UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND BALTIMORE · PI DA SILVA, JOYCE TEIXEIRA, SCHABRUN, SIOBHAN · 2019 to 2019
$1.4M
NIH HHS 1R61NS113269-01NINDS NIH HHS R61 NS113269
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) has been used to examine inhibitory and facilitatory circuits during experimental pain and in chronic pain populations. However, current applications of TMS to pain have been restricted to measurements of motor evoked potentials (MEPs) from peripheral muscles. Here, TMS was combined with electroencephalography (EEG) to determine whether experimental pain could induce alterations in cortical inhibitory/facilitatory activity observed in TMS-evoked potentials (TEPs). In Experiment 1 (n=29), multiple sustained thermal stimuli were administered to the forearm, with the first, second, and third block of thermal stimuli consisting of warm but non-painful (pre-pain block), painful (pain block) and warm but non-painful (post-pain block) temperatures, respectively. During each stimulus, TMS pulses were delivered while EEG (64 channels) was simultaneously recorded. Verbal pain ratings were collected between TMS pulses. Relative to pre-pain warm stimuli, painful stimuli led to an increase in the amplitude of the frontocentral negative peak ~45 ms post-TMS (N45), with a larger increase associated with higher pain ratings. Experiments 2 and 3 (n=10 in each) showed that the increase in the N45 in response to pain was not due to changes in sensory potentials associated with TMS, or a result of stronger reafferent muscle feedback during pain. This is the first study to use combined TMS-EEG to examine alterations in cortical excitability in response to pain. These results suggest that the N45 TEP peak, which indexes GABAergic neurotransmission, is implicated in pain perception and is a potential marker of individual differences in pain sensitivity.

Indexed as

Motor CortexTranscranial Magnetic StimulationElectroencephalographyEvoked PotentialsHumansPainacute paincombined TMS-EEGelectroencephalographyexperimental painhumanneurosciencetranscranial magnetic stimulation

Identifiers

PMID37966464
PMCPMC10651174
OpenAlexW4383534480

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.