ArticleClinical neurophysiology practice2026
Tactile perception and tolerability thresholds of TMS characterized by intensity across locations and frequencies.
Article in Clinical neurophysiology practice, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Innovations in repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation: a review of clinical evidence and patient-reported outcomes for ExoTMS.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS) involves pulsed magnetic fields that pass through the scalp to stimulate the brain, with incidental stimulation to superficial nerves and muscles. This study characterizes the scalp sensations of TMS by location (over modified BeamF3 prefrontal, THREE-D prefrontal, right orbitofrontal, medial prefrontal, motor, and parietal cortical targets, as well as the knee) and by frequency (1 Hz, 10 Hz, or iTBS), with increasing levels of stimulation intensity. Methods: Study participants ( Results: For location, sites distal to the facial nerves and muscle (Knee, P3, M1, mPFC) were more tolerable, followed by BeamF3, with the THREE-D and AF8 locations as least tolerable. For frequency, we found that 1 Hz was significantly more tolerable than 10 Hz and iTBS. iTBS was more annoying than 10 Hz but only marginally different in tolerability. Conclusions: The sensation and tolerability of TMS is dependent on stimulation location, and frequency, with increasing stimulation intensity. Significance: From a research perspective, the tactile sensations can be a problematic confound, particularly when stimulation approaches an unpleasant or painful level. Clinically, providers need data on adjustments to stimulation parameters to improve tolerability and efficacy. This study provides TMS researchers and clinicians with empirical data to inform respective endeavors.
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.