ArticleExperimental brain research2026
Cervicothoracic trans-spinal magnetic stimulation: effect of coil position and orientation on spinal motor evoked potentials.
Article in Experimental brain research, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Stroke is a leading cause of long-term adult disability, and over 80% of survivors have persistent upper limb motor impairment. Spinal electrical stimulation has shown therapeutic potential after neurological disorders. Post-stroke applications have largely relied on invasive implants that limit clinical adoption, and non-invasive high intensity electrical stimulation may be intolerable for those with residual sensory function. Trans-spinal magnetic stimulation offers a non-invasive alternative capable of modulating residual sensorimotor pathways. Fundamental parameters, such as coil position and orientation, remain under-investigated. Two experiments were conducted to fill this gap. Experiment 1: 19 healthy adults underwent spinal mapping involving 30 cervicothoracic sites (3×10 grid). Responses were recorded from 6 upper limb muscles bilaterally at suprathreshold intensity using a rostral-left induced current direction. Friedman ANOVAs revealed significant medial-lateral and rostral-caudal variation in amplitude of spinal motor evoked potentials (sMEPs): ipsilateral>midline>contralateral, with arm responses peaking rostrally, wrist at mid-rows, and hand caudally. Experiment 2: 20 healthy adults received stimulation at three horizontal cervicothoracic sites using eight current directions spaced 45° apart. Friedman ANOVAs indicated a bilateral mirror-symmetrical pattern. The largest responses from left-sided muscles were elicited with a rostral-left current direction achieved by rotating the coil handle 45° counterclockwise from the caudal direction. Likewise, the largest right-sided muscle responses were elicited with a rostral-right current direction achieved by rotating the coil handle 315° counterclockwise. Coil position and orientation are critical determinants of sMEP amplitude. These results provide a foundational framework to further investigate cervicothoracic magnetic stimulation as a potential non-invasive neuromodulatory intervention.
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.