Effects of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation and their underlying neural mechanisms evaluated with magnetic resonance imaging-based brain connectivity network analyses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is a noninvasive brain modulation and rehabilitation technique used in patients with neuropsychiatric diseases. rTMS can structurally remodel or functionally induce activities of specific cortical regions and has developed to an important therapeutic method in such patients. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) provides brain data that can be used as an explanation tool for the neural mechanisms underlying rTMS effects; brain alterations related to different functions or structures may be reflected in changes in the interaction and influence of brain connections within intrinsic specific networks. In this review, we discuss the technical details of rTMS and the biological interpretation of brain networks identified with MRI analyses, comprehensively summarize the neurobiological effects in rTMS-modulated individuals, and elaborate on changes in the brain network in patients with various neuropsychiatric diseases receiving rehabilitation treatment with rTMS. We conclude that brain connectivity network analysis based on MRI can reflect alterations in functional and structural connectivity networks comprising adjacent and separated brain regions related to stimulation sites, thus reflecting the occurrence of intrinsic functional integration and neuroplasticity. Therefore, MRI is a valuable tool for understanding the neural mechanisms of rTMS and practically tailoring treatment plans for patients with neuropsychiatric diseases.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".