Trial reportJournal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation2024
Repetitive temporal interference stimulation improves jump performance but not the postural stability in young healthy males: a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Modulation of cognitive and motor functions by temporal interference stimulation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of efficacy and variability.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Pooled it
- Temporal Interference Stimulation Boosts Working Memory Performance in the Frontoparietal Network.Human brain mapping · 2025Trial
- Direction-Dependent Effects of White-Matter Conductivity Anisotropy on Modulation Depth and Spatial Extent in Transcranial Interference Stimulation: A Simulation Study.Brain topography · 2026Article
- Temporal Interference Electrical Stimulation for Neuropsychiatric Disorders: Mechanisms, Applications, and Translational Perspectives.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Distinctive roles of left and right entorhinal cortex in path integration via a non-invasive stimulation study.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Human Applications of Transcranial Temporal Interference Stimulation: A Systematic Review.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2025Article
- Article
- Temporal interference stimulation over the motor cortex enhances cortical excitability in rats.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Comparison of Landing Biomechanics in Male Amateur Basketball Players with and without Patellar Tendinopathy during Simulated Games.Journal of human kinetics · 2025Article
- The effect of neuro-enhancement technology on proprioception in patients with anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2025Article
- Beyond the surface: a review of transcranial temporal interference stimulation for deep brain modulation.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Review
- 20 Hz temporal interference stimulation can more effectively enhance motor evoked potentials in the primary motor cortex.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTemporal interference (TI) stimulation, an innovative non-invasive brain stimulation technique, has the potential to activate neurons in deep brain regions. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effects of repetitive TI stimulation targeting the lower limb motor control area (i.e., the M1 leg area) on lower limb motor function in healthy individuals, which could provide evidence for further translational application of non-invasive deep brain stimulation.
methodsIn this randomized, double-blinded, parallel-controlled trial, 46 healthy male adults were randomly divided into the TI or sham group. The TI group received 2 mA (peak-to-peak) TI stimulation targeting the M1 leg area with a 20 Hz frequency difference (2 kHz and 2.02 kHz). Stimulation parameters of the sham group were consistent with those of the TI group but the current input lasted only 1 min (30 s ramp-up and ramp-down). Both groups received stimulation twice daily for five consecutive days. The vertical jump test (countermovement jump [CMJ], squat jump [SJ], and continuous jump [CJ]) and Y-balance test were performed before and after the total intervention session. Two-way repeated measures ANOVA (group × time) was performed to evaluate the effects of TI stimulation on lower limb motor function.
resultsForty participants completed all scheduled study visits. Two-way repeated measures ANOVA showed significant group × time interaction effects for CMJ height (F = 8.858, p = 0.005) and SJ height (F = 6.523, p = 0.015). The interaction effect of the average CJ height of the first 15 s was marginally significant (F = 3.550, p = 0.067). However, there was no significant interaction effect on the Y balance (p > 0.05). Further within-group comparisons showed a significant post-intervention increase in the height of the CMJ (p = 0.004), SJ (p = 0.010) and the average CJ height of the first 15 s (p = 0.004) in the TI group.
conclusionRepetitive TI stimulation targeting the lower limb motor control area effectively increased vertical jump height in healthy adult males but had no significant effect on dynamic postural stability.
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.