MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4212805471 · doi:10.3389/fnins.2022.787403

Insight Into the Effects of Clinical Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation on the Brain From Positron Emission Tomography and Magnetic Resonance Imaging Studies: A Narrative Review

2022· review· en· W4212805471 on OpenAlexafffund
Lucero Aceves-Serrano, Jason L. Neva, Doris J. Doudet

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Neuroscience · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalInstitut Universitaire de Gériatrie de MontréalUniversity of British Columbia
FundersFondation Brain Canada
KeywordsTranscranial magnetic stimulationPositron emission tomographyNeuroimagingMagnetic resonance imagingFunctional magnetic resonance imagingNeuroscienceMedicineDiffusion MRIResting state fMRIBrain stimulationStimulationPsychologyFunctional imagingBrain activity and meditationElectroencephalographyRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) has been proposed as a therapeutic tool to alleviate symptoms for neurological and psychiatric diseases such as chronic pain, stroke, Parkinson's disease, major depressive disorder, and others. Although the therapeutic potential of rTMS has been widely explored, the neurological basis of its effects is still not fully understood. Fortunately, the continuous development of imaging techniques has advanced our understanding of rTMS neurobiological underpinnings on the healthy and diseased brain. The objective of the current work is to summarize relevant findings from positron emission tomography (PET) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) techniques evaluating rTMS effects. We included studies that investigated the modulation of neurotransmission (evaluated with PET and magnetic resonance spectroscopy), brain activity (evaluated with PET), resting-state connectivity (evaluated with resting-state functional MRI), and microstructure (diffusion tensor imaging). Overall, results from imaging studies suggest that the effects of rTMS are complex and involve multiple neurotransmission systems, regions, and networks. The effects of stimulation seem to not only be dependent in the frequency used, but also in the participants characteristics such as disease progression. In patient populations, pre-stimulation evaluation was reported to predict responsiveness to stimulation, while post-stimulation neuroimaging measurements showed to be correlated with symptomatic improvement. These studies demonstrate the complexity of rTMS effects and highlight the relevance of imaging techniques.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.982
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.055
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.311 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations29
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in NeuroscienceSame topicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation StudiesFrench-language works237,207