Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40577046›Full record

ArticleJMIR research protocols2025

Corticospinal Intermittent Theta Burst Stimulation Propelling Sensorimotor Function Recovery in Complete Spinal Cord Injury: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial.

Deeksha Patel, Rohit Banerjee, Kamran Farooque, Deepak Gupta, Bhavuk Garg, Nand Kumar, Kanwal Preet Kochhar, Suman Jain

Abstract readClinical Trial Protocol
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR research protocols, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
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

8 authors.

Deeksha PatelDepartment of Physiology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, Delhi, India.ORCID 0000-0002-8234-045X
Rohit BanerjeeDepartment of Physiology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, Delhi, India.ORCID 0000-0003-3440-7477
Kamran FarooqueDepartment of Orthopedics, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, Delhi, India.ORCID 0000-0002-8541-4303
Deepak GuptaDepartment of Neurosurgery, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, New Delhi, India.ORCID 0000-0001-7698-5668
Bhavuk GargDepartment of Orthopedics, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, Delhi, India.ORCID 0000-0003-3169-6437
Nand KumarDepartment of Psychiatry, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, Delhi, India.ORCID 0000-0002-2538-996X
Kanwal Preet KochharDepartment of Physiology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, Delhi, India.ORCID 0000-0003-3458-3657
Suman JainDepartment of Physiology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, Delhi, India.ORCID 0000-0002-1428-605X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIntermittent theta burst stimulation (iTBS) is a noninvasive stimulation technique to induce neuronal and synaptic plasticity. The induced cortical plasticity is imperative in the recovery of motor and sensory functions. Spinal cord injury (SCI) causes damage to neurons and results in sensorimotor dysfunction. The effect of iTBS on recovery of motor and sensory dysfunction in complete SCI (cSCI) is still elusive.

objectiveThis study aims to assess the effect of iTBS on corticospinal tract integrity, plasticity, and regaining of motor and sensory function in patients with cSCI. The rationale behind using an iTBS protocol is to modify and augment the communication between spared neurons of the corticospinal tract and strengthen the synaptic transmission, which will improve motor function in underlying muscles.

methodsA total of 40 patients with cSCI with American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA) grade A, aged 18-60 years, were randomly assigned to 5 groups. To evaluate the efficacy of iTBS versus traditional repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation, patients were categorized into placebo, repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation, and iTBS. In addition, to determine the optimal site for stimulation, groups were further subdivided into motor cortex, spinal cord, and combined. Each patient underwent 10 iTBS sessions twice daily for 5 consecutive days. Neurological outcomes and functional outcome parameters will be assessed. Electrophysiological evaluations included transcranial magnetic stimulation single-pulse and paired-pulse parameters. The effect of iTBS intervention on biomarkers will be quantified using the enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, while neurotransmitters will be quantified by liquid chromatography and tandem mass spectrometry. Measurements will be done before and after the intervention, with follow-ups at 1, 2, and 3 months.

resultsThe outcome of the study will be defined by electrophysiological parameters elicited by single- and paired-pulse stimulation, ASIA score, pain, activities of daily life, quality of life, anxiety, depression, and biomarkers related to SCI. The results of this study will uncover the effectiveness of iTBS stimulation on (1) recovery of motor and sensory function in cSCI, (2) excitability of the corticospinal tract, (3) neurological recovery and modulation of pain, and (4) cortical reorganization after injury.

conclusionsiTBS in conjunction with an individualized rehabilitation program may serve as an integrated strategy to rejuvenate locomotor abilities and improve the overall quality of life for people with cSCI.

trial registrationClinical Trials Registry- India CTRI/2022/11/047038; https://ctri.nic.in/Clinicaltrials/main1.php?EncHid=13361.98443. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/66531.

Indexed as

Pyramidal TractsRecovery of FunctionSpinal Cord InjuriesTranscranial Magnetic StimulationAdolescentAdultFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedMotor CortexNeuronal PlasticityRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTreatment OutcomeYoung AdultAmerican Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scaleexcitatory-inhibitory circuitryintermittent theta burst stimulationphysical rehabilitationprotocolrandomized control trialspinal cord injurysynaptic plasticity

Identifiers

PMID40577046
PMCPMC12254704

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.