ArticleImaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.)2025
Efficient prospective electric field-informed localization of motor cortical targets of transcranial magnetic stimulation.
Article in Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.), 2025. 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.
- Efficient Gaussian process-based motor hotspot hunting with concurrent optimization of TMS coil location and orientation.PLoS computational biology · 2026Article
- The Freiburg framework for multimodalFrontiers in synaptic neuroscience · 2026Article
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
Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is a versatile non-invasive tool for brain mapping and neuromodulation in both healthy individuals and patients. Effective TMS-based causal brain mapping relies on precise localization of cortical targets. Current state-of-the-art approaches use statistical methods to quantify the relationship between TMS-induced electric fields (E-fields) and motor evoked potential (MEP) amplitudes. However, this method typically relies on the random selection of coil configurations, which limits its efficacy. In this study, we present a novel optimization strategy for TMS-based motor mapping by prospectively selecting coil configurations based on their E-field characteristics using an iterative sampling algorithm called farthest point sampling (FPS). Through a combination of theoretical analysis, simulation and experimental validation, including 10 healthy individuals, we systematically evaluated the performance of FPS against the random sampling approach. Our results demonstrate that FPS (median: 49.5 trials) is twice as sample-efficient as random sampling (median: 91.0 trials) in reducing the number of trials required to estimate the motor map. Moreover, FPS shows greater consistency across participants, as reflected in the narrower confidence intervals. These findings highlight the potential of FPS to significantly enhance the sample-efficiency of motor mapping, paving the way for the development of more effective TMS mapping algorithms.
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.