ArticleFrontiers in human neuroscience2025
20 Hz temporal interference stimulation can more effectively enhance motor evoked potentials in the primary motor cortex.
Article in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This study investigates the effects of temporal interference stimulation (TI) with different envelope frequencies on the cortical excitability of the primary motor cortex (M1). Methods: In this randomized, double-blind, crossover study, 26 participants completed four separate study visits. During these visits, they received 20 min of three types of TI (10, 20, and 40 Hz envelope frequency) and sham stimulation applied over M1 in a randomized order. Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) was employed to assess motor-evoked potentials (MEP) and resting motor threshold (RMT) over the left M1 (ipsilateral area) and right M1 (contralateral area) before, immediately after, and 30 and 60 min after stimulation. Results: The blinding efficacy was excellent, and no severe side effects were reported. TI stimulation with varying envelope frequencies affected MEP differently; 20 Hz TI stimulation enhanced the MEP of the ipsilateral M1 with after-effects appearing at 60 min, and no significant differences were observed between the 10 or 20 Hz TI stimulation with sham groups. However, no significant changes in RMT were observed under any of the TI conditions. Conclusion: 20 Hz TI stimulation increased the cortical excitability of the ipsilateral M1, highlighting that frequency is an important factor in the modulatory effect of TI.
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.