Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37996562›Full record

ArticleBrain topography2024

Evoked EEG Responses to TMS Targeting Regions Outside the Primary Motor Cortex and Their Test-Retest Reliability.

Yufei Song, Pedro C Gordon, Johanna Metsomaa, Maryam Rostami, Paolo Belardinelli, Ulf Ziemann

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Brain topography, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  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. Article
  5. 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

6 authors.

Yufei SongDepartment of Neurology and Stroke, University of Tübingen, Hoppe-Seyler-Straße 3, 72076, Tübingen, Germany.
Pedro C GordonDepartment of Neurology and Stroke, University of Tübingen, Hoppe-Seyler-Straße 3, 72076, Tübingen, Germany.
Johanna MetsomaaDepartment of Neurology and Stroke, University of Tübingen, Hoppe-Seyler-Straße 3, 72076, Tübingen, Germany.
Maryam RostamiFaculty of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.
Paolo BelardinelliDepartment of Neurology and Stroke, University of Tübingen, Hoppe-Seyler-Straße 3, 72076, Tübingen, Germany.
Ulf ZiemannDepartment of Neurology and Stroke, University of Tübingen, Hoppe-Seyler-Straße 3, 72076, Tübingen, Germany. ulf.ziemann@uni-tuebingen.de.

Funding

China Scholarship Council 201908310117Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft 466 458 984HORIZON EUROPE European Research Council 810377
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS)-evoked electroencephalography (EEG) potentials (TEPs) provide unique insights into cortical excitability and connectivity. However, confounding EEG signals from auditory and somatosensory co-stimulation complicate TEP interpretation. Our optimized sham procedure established with TMS of primary motor cortex (Gordon in JAMA 245:118708, 2021) differentiates direct cortical EEG responses to TMS from those caused by peripheral sensory inputs. Using this approach, this study aimed to investigate TEPs and their test-retest reliability when targeting regions outside the primary motor cortex, specifically the left angular gyrus, supplementary motor area, and medial prefrontal cortex. We conducted three identical TMS-EEG sessions one week apart involving 24 healthy participants. In each session, we targeted the three areas separately using a figure-of-eight TMS coil for active TMS, while a second coil away from the head produced auditory input for sham TMS. Masking noise and electric scalp stimulation were applied in both conditions to achieve matched EEG responses to peripheral sensory inputs. High test-retest reliability was observed in both conditions. However, reliability declined for the 'cleaned' TEPs, resulting from the subtraction of evoked EEG response to the sham TMS from those to the active, particularly for latencies > 100 ms following the TMS pulse. Significant EEG differences were found between active and sham TMS at latencies < 90 ms for all targeted areas, exhibiting distinct spatiotemporal characteristics specific to each target. In conclusion, our optimized sham procedure effectively reveals EEG responses to direct cortical activation by TMS in brain areas outside primary motor cortex. Moreover, we demonstrate the impact of peripheral sensory inputs on test-retest reliability of TMS-EEG responses.

Indexed as

Motor CortexTranscranial Magnetic StimulationElectroencephalographyEvoked PotentialsEvoked Potentials, MotorHumansReproducibility of ResultsElectroencephalographyEvoked potentialsOptimized sham procedureTest–retest reliabilityTMS-EEGTranscranial magnetic stimulation

Identifiers

PMID37996562
PMCPMC10771591

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.