ArticleBrain and behavior2024
The protective effects of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation with different high frequencies on motor functions in MPTP/probenecid induced Parkinsonism mouse models.
Article in Brain and behavior, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Effect of Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Treatment on Plasma BDNF Concentration and Executive Functions in Parkinson's Disease: A Theoretical Translational Medicine Approach.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- The protective effects of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation with different high frequencies on motor functions in MPTP/probenecid induced Parkinsonism mouse models.Brain and behavior · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundHigh-frequency repeated transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) stimulating the primary motor cortex (M1) is an alternative, adjunctive therapy for improving the motor symptoms of Parkinson's disease (PD). However, whether the high frequency of rTMS positively correlates to the improvement of motor symptoms of PD is still undecided. By controlling for other parameters, a disease animal model may be useful to compare the neuroprotective effects of different high frequencies of rTMS.
objectiveThe current exploratory study was designed to compare the protective effects of four common high frequencies of rTMS (5, 10, 15, and 20 Hz) and iTBS (a special form of high-frequency rTMS) and explore the optimal high-frequency rTMS on an animal PD model.
methodsFollowing high frequencies of rTMS application (twice a week for 5 weeks) in a MPTP/probenecid-induced chronic PD model, the effects of the five protocols on motor behavior as well as dopaminergic neuron degeneration levels were identified. The underlying molecular mechanisms were further explored.
resultsWe found that all the high frequencies of rTMS had protective effects on the motor functions of PD models to varying degrees. Among them, the 10, 15, and 20 Hz rTMS interventions induced comparable preservation of motor function through the protection of nigrostriatal dopamine neurons. The enhancement of brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF), dopamine transporter (DAT), and vesicular monoamine transporter 2 (VMAT-2) and the suppression of TNF-α and IL-1β in the nigrostriatum were involved in the process. The efficacy of iTBS was inferior to that of the above three protocols. The effect of 5 Hz rTMS protocol was weakest.
conclusionsCombined with the results of the present study and the possible side effects induced by rTMS, we concluded that 10 Hz might be the optimal stimulation frequency for preserving the motor functions of PD models using rTMS treatment.
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.