↓ Skip to main content

Determining the number of stimuli required to reliably assess corticomotor excitability and primary motor cortical representations using transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS): a protocol for a…

Overview of attention for article published in Systematic Reviews, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
64 Mendeley
Title
Determining the number of stimuli required to reliably assess corticomotor excitability and primary motor cortical representations using transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS): a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis
Published in
Systematic Reviews, August 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13643-015-0095-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rocco Cavaleri, Siobhan M. Schabrun, Lucy S. Chipchase

Abstract

Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is a technique that can be used to assess corticospinal plasticity. Current TMS practices involve the administration of multiple stimuli over target areas of the participant's scalp. However, these procedures require 1 to 2 h per assessment. Decreasing the number of stimuli delivered during TMS assessments would improve time efficiency and decrease participant demand. Thus, the aim of this review is to determine the number of TMS stimuli required to reliably measure (1) corticomotor excitability to a target muscle at a single cranial site and (2) the topography of the primary motor cortical representation for a target muscle across multiple cranial sites (termed 'mapping'). A systematic review and meta-analysis will be conducted. Electronic databases will be searched using pre-determined search terms to identify relevant studies and evaluate the studies for inclusion and risks of bias. Two independent reviewers will extract the data. Any disagreements will be resolved by a third reviewer. Studies employing single-pulse TMS to measure (1) corticomotor excitability at a single cranial site or (2) the topographic cortical organisation of a target muscle across a number of cranial sites, published before May 2015, will be included if they meet the eligibility criteria. Outcomes will include motor-evoked potential amplitude, map volume, number of active map sites, location of the map centre of gravity, and distance between the centres of gravity of the target muscle and one or more neighbouring muscles. To our knowledge, this review will be the first to systematically explore the number of TMS stimuli required to reliably measure both corticomotor excitability and the topography of primary motor cortical representations. This research has the capacity to improve the efficiency of TMS, decrease participant demand, and facilitate the use of TMS as an outcome measurement tool in clinical populations. PROSPERO CRD42015024579.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 64 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 2%
Unknown 63 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 20%
Researcher 9 14%
Student > Master 7 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 9%
Student > Bachelor 6 9%
Other 14 22%
Unknown 9 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 19 30%
Neuroscience 9 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 8%
Psychology 5 8%
Other 9 14%
Unknown 11 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 April 2017.
All research outputs
#17,853,477
of 22,953,506 outputs
Outputs from Systematic Reviews
#1,707
of 2,005 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#178,272
of 264,791 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Systematic Reviews
#13
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,953,506 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,005 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.7. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 264,791 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.