Comparison of Rossini–Rothwell and adaptive threshold‐hunting methods on the stability of TMS induced motor evoked potentials amplitudes
Several methods can be used to determine the resting motor threshold (RMT) and by that recording transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) induced motor evoked potentials (MEPs). However, no research has compared the test retest reliability of these methods. Thus, the aim of this study was to determin...
Uloženo v:
| Vydáno v: | Journal of neuroscience research Ročník 96; číslo 11; s. 1758 - 1765 |
|---|---|
| Hlavní autoři: | , , , , |
| Médium: | Journal Article |
| Jazyk: | angličtina |
| Vydáno: |
United States
Wiley Subscription Services, Inc
01.11.2018
|
| Témata: | |
| ISSN: | 0360-4012, 1097-4547, 1097-4547 |
| On-line přístup: | Získat plný text |
| Tagy: |
Přidat tag
Žádné tagy, Buďte první, kdo vytvoří štítek k tomuto záznamu!
|
| Abstract | Several methods can be used to determine the resting motor threshold (RMT) and by that recording transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) induced motor evoked potentials (MEPs). However, no research has compared the test retest reliability of these methods. Thus, the aim of this study was to determine intra‐ and inter‐session reliability of Rossini–Rothwell (R–R) and parameter estimation by sequential testing (PEST) methods on TMS‐induced MEPs and comparison of these two methods on RMT. Twelve healthy individuals participated in this study three times (T1, T2 and T3) over two days. TMS was applied using both R–R and PEST to estimate RMT and average of 25 MEPs were acquired at each of the three time points. The intra‐class correlation coefficient indicated high intra‐session reliability in the MEP amplitudes for both methods (0.79 and 0.88, R–R and PEST respectively). The RMT and MEP amplitudes had higher inter‐session reliability in both methods (0.99 and 0.998, R–R and PEST respectively; 0.84 and 0.76, R–R and PEST respectively). There was no significant difference between methods for RMT at both T1 (maximum stimulator output of R–R vs. PEST, 33.7% ± 7.7% vs. 33.8% ± 7.6%, p = 0.75) and T3 (maximum stimulator output of R–R vs. PEST, 33.5% ± 7.3% vs. 33.7% ± 7.3%, p = 0.19). There was a significant positive correlation between the methods' estimates of RMT, with PEST requiring significantly fewer stimuli. This study shows that the R–R and PEST methods have high intra‐and inter‐session reliability and the same precision, with PEST having the advantage over R–R in speed of estimation of RMT.
R–R and PEST methods are highly reliable for finding RMT, and that there is no difference between TMS‐induced MEPs derived with the methods when measured on two occasions on the same day or between days. |
|---|---|
| AbstractList | Several methods can be used to determine the resting motor threshold (RMT) and by that recording transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) induced motor evoked potentials (MEPs). However, no research has compared the test retest reliability of these methods. Thus, the aim of this study was to determine intra‐ and inter‐session reliability of Rossini–Rothwell (R–R) and parameter estimation by sequential testing (PEST) methods on TMS‐induced MEPs and comparison of these two methods on RMT. Twelve healthy individuals participated in this study three times (T1, T2 and T3) over two days. TMS was applied using both R–R and PEST to estimate RMT and average of 25 MEPs were acquired at each of the three time points. The intra‐class correlation coefficient indicated high intra‐session reliability in the MEP amplitudes for both methods (0.79 and 0.88, R–R and PEST respectively). The RMT and MEP amplitudes had higher inter‐session reliability in both methods (0.99 and 0.998, R–R and PEST respectively; 0.84 and 0.76, R–R and PEST respectively). There was no significant difference between methods for RMT at both T1 (maximum stimulator output of R–R vs. PEST, 33.7% ± 7.7% vs. 33.8% ± 7.6%, p = 0.75) and T3 (maximum stimulator output of R–R vs. PEST, 33.5% ± 7.3% vs. 33.7% ± 7.3%, p = 0.19). There was a significant positive correlation between the methods' estimates of RMT, with PEST requiring significantly fewer stimuli. This study shows that the R–R and PEST methods have high intra‐and inter‐session reliability and the same precision, with PEST having the advantage over R–R in speed of estimation of RMT. Several methods can be used to determine the resting motor threshold (RMT) and by that recording transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) induced motor evoked potentials (MEPs). However, no research has compared the test retest reliability of these methods. Thus, the aim of this study was to determine intra‐ and inter‐session reliability of Rossini–Rothwell (R–R) and parameter estimation by sequential testing (PEST) methods on TMS‐induced MEPs and comparison of these two methods on RMT. Twelve healthy individuals participated in this study three times (T1, T2 and T3) over two days. TMS was applied using both R–R and PEST to estimate RMT and average of 25 MEPs were acquired at each of the three time points. The intra‐class correlation coefficient indicated high intra‐session reliability in the MEP amplitudes for both methods (0.79 and 0.88, R–R and PEST respectively). The RMT and MEP amplitudes had higher inter‐session reliability in both methods (0.99 and 0.998, R–R and PEST respectively; 0.84 and 0.76, R–R and PEST respectively). There was no significant difference between methods for RMT at both T1 (maximum stimulator output of R–R vs. PEST, 33.7% ± 7.7% vs. 33.8% ± 7.6%, p = 0.75) and T3 (maximum stimulator output of R–R vs. PEST, 33.5% ± 7.3% vs. 33.7% ± 7.3%, p = 0.19). There was a significant positive correlation between the methods' estimates of RMT, with PEST requiring significantly fewer stimuli. This study shows that the R–R and PEST methods have high intra‐and inter‐session reliability and the same precision, with PEST having the advantage over R–R in speed of estimation of RMT. Several methods can be used to determine the resting motor threshold (RMT) and by that recording transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) induced motor evoked potentials (MEPs). However, no research has compared the test retest reliability of these methods. Thus, the aim of this study was to determine intra- and inter-session reliability of Rossini-Rothwell (R-R) and parameter estimation by sequential testing (PEST) methods on TMS-induced MEPs and comparison of these two methods on RMT. Twelve healthy individuals participated in this study three times (T1, T2 and T3) over two days. TMS was applied using both R-R and PEST to estimate RMT and average of 25 MEPs were acquired at each of the three time points. The intra-class correlation coefficient indicated high intra-session reliability in the MEP amplitudes for both methods (0.79 and 0.88, R-R and PEST respectively). The RMT and MEP amplitudes had higher inter-session reliability in both methods (0.99 and 0.998, R-R and PEST respectively; 0.84 and 0.76, R-R and PEST respectively). There was no significant difference between methods for RMT at both T1 (maximum stimulator output of R-R vs. PEST, 33.7% ± 7.7% vs. 33.8% ± 7.6%, p = 0.75) and T3 (maximum stimulator output of R-R vs. PEST, 33.5% ± 7.3% vs. 33.7% ± 7.3%, p = 0.19). There was a significant positive correlation between the methods' estimates of RMT, with PEST requiring significantly fewer stimuli. This study shows that the R-R and PEST methods have high intra-and inter-session reliability and the same precision, with PEST having the advantage over R-R in speed of estimation of RMT. Several methods can be used to determine the resting motor threshold (RMT) and by that recording transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) induced motor evoked potentials (MEPs). However, no research has compared the test retest reliability of these methods. Thus, the aim of this study was to determine intra‐ and inter‐session reliability of Rossini–Rothwell (R–R) and parameter estimation by sequential testing (PEST) methods on TMS‐induced MEPs and comparison of these two methods on RMT. Twelve healthy individuals participated in this study three times (T1, T2 and T3) over two days. TMS was applied using both R–R and PEST to estimate RMT and average of 25 MEPs were acquired at each of the three time points. The intra‐class correlation coefficient indicated high intra‐session reliability in the MEP amplitudes for both methods (0.79 and 0.88, R–R and PEST respectively). The RMT and MEP amplitudes had higher inter‐session reliability in both methods (0.99 and 0.998, R–R and PEST respectively; 0.84 and 0.76, R–R and PEST respectively). There was no significant difference between methods for RMT at both T1 (maximum stimulator output of R–R vs. PEST, 33.7% ± 7.7% vs. 33.8% ± 7.6%, p = 0.75) and T3 (maximum stimulator output of R–R vs. PEST, 33.5% ± 7.3% vs. 33.7% ± 7.3%, p = 0.19). There was a significant positive correlation between the methods' estimates of RMT, with PEST requiring significantly fewer stimuli. This study shows that the R–R and PEST methods have high intra‐and inter‐session reliability and the same precision, with PEST having the advantage over R–R in speed of estimation of RMT. R–R and PEST methods are highly reliable for finding RMT, and that there is no difference between TMS‐induced MEPs derived with the methods when measured on two occasions on the same day or between days. Several methods can be used to determine the resting motor threshold (RMT) and by that recording transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) induced motor evoked potentials (MEPs). However, no research has compared the test retest reliability of these methods. Thus, the aim of this study was to determine intra- and inter-session reliability of Rossini-Rothwell (R-R) and parameter estimation by sequential testing (PEST) methods on TMS-induced MEPs and comparison of these two methods on RMT. Twelve healthy individuals participated in this study three times (T1, T2 and T3) over two days. TMS was applied using both R-R and PEST to estimate RMT and average of 25 MEPs were acquired at each of the three time points. The intra-class correlation coefficient indicated high intra-session reliability in the MEP amplitudes for both methods (0.79 and 0.88, R-R and PEST respectively). The RMT and MEP amplitudes had higher inter-session reliability in both methods (0.99 and 0.998, R-R and PEST respectively; 0.84 and 0.76, R-R and PEST respectively). There was no significant difference between methods for RMT at both T1 (maximum stimulator output of R-R vs. PEST, 33.7% ± 7.7% vs. 33.8% ± 7.6%, p = 0.75) and T3 (maximum stimulator output of R-R vs. PEST, 33.5% ± 7.3% vs. 33.7% ± 7.3%, p = 0.19). There was a significant positive correlation between the methods' estimates of RMT, with PEST requiring significantly fewer stimuli. This study shows that the R-R and PEST methods have high intra-and inter-session reliability and the same precision, with PEST having the advantage over R-R in speed of estimation of RMT.Several methods can be used to determine the resting motor threshold (RMT) and by that recording transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) induced motor evoked potentials (MEPs). However, no research has compared the test retest reliability of these methods. Thus, the aim of this study was to determine intra- and inter-session reliability of Rossini-Rothwell (R-R) and parameter estimation by sequential testing (PEST) methods on TMS-induced MEPs and comparison of these two methods on RMT. Twelve healthy individuals participated in this study three times (T1, T2 and T3) over two days. TMS was applied using both R-R and PEST to estimate RMT and average of 25 MEPs were acquired at each of the three time points. The intra-class correlation coefficient indicated high intra-session reliability in the MEP amplitudes for both methods (0.79 and 0.88, R-R and PEST respectively). The RMT and MEP amplitudes had higher inter-session reliability in both methods (0.99 and 0.998, R-R and PEST respectively; 0.84 and 0.76, R-R and PEST respectively). There was no significant difference between methods for RMT at both T1 (maximum stimulator output of R-R vs. PEST, 33.7% ± 7.7% vs. 33.8% ± 7.6%, p = 0.75) and T3 (maximum stimulator output of R-R vs. PEST, 33.5% ± 7.3% vs. 33.7% ± 7.3%, p = 0.19). There was a significant positive correlation between the methods' estimates of RMT, with PEST requiring significantly fewer stimuli. This study shows that the R-R and PEST methods have high intra-and inter-session reliability and the same precision, with PEST having the advantage over R-R in speed of estimation of RMT. |
| Author | Farrell, Michael Dissanayaka, Thusharika Zoghi, Maryam Jaberzadeh, Shapour Egan, Gary |
| Author_xml | – sequence: 1 givenname: Thusharika orcidid: 0000-0002-8681-7681 surname: Dissanayaka fullname: Dissanayaka, Thusharika email: thusharika.dissanayaka@monash.edu organization: Monash University – sequence: 2 givenname: Maryam surname: Zoghi fullname: Zoghi, Maryam organization: La Trobe University – sequence: 3 givenname: Michael surname: Farrell fullname: Farrell, Michael organization: Monash University – sequence: 4 givenname: Gary surname: Egan fullname: Egan, Gary organization: Monash University – sequence: 5 givenname: Shapour surname: Jaberzadeh fullname: Jaberzadeh, Shapour organization: Monash University |
| BackLink | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30175849$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed |
| BookMark | eNp9kb1uFDEUhS0URDYLBS-ALNFAMYk9_y7RKvwpgLRsb_nnDuNlxh5sT6Lt8gApIvGGeRK8bKCIBNWVr75zdH3OCTqyzgJCzyk5pYTkZ1vrT_OyoOwRWlDCmqysyuYILUhRk6wkND9GJyFsCSGMVcUTdFwQ2lRtyRboZuXGSXgTnMWuw2sXgrHm7vrn2sX-CoYBC6ux0GKK5hJw7D2E3g367vq2n2009hseIfZOB5wcYg84RCHNYOJu77f59BUbq2cFGo8uOo_h0n1Pj8lFSHIxBCzGKeGzhvAUPe7SBp7dzyXavD3frN5nF1_efVi9uchU0bYsk11Duk5VmilR10WlQFHSNk1bgazbuoVWQk5FJypFoWWylkpLVlFQIKWkxRK9OthO3v2YIUQ-mqDSX4UFNweep5hISRnboy8foFs3e5uO4zmleUUoTRcs0Yt7apYjaD55Mwq_439iTsDrA6B8CthD9xehhO8r5KlC_rvCxJ49YJWJIhpnoxdm-J_iygyw-7c1__h5fVD8Ahtrsk4 |
| CitedBy_id | crossref_primary_10_1016_j_neurobiolaging_2023_09_007 crossref_primary_10_3389_fpsyt_2022_823158 crossref_primary_10_1523_JNEUROSCI_2961_20_2021 crossref_primary_10_1371_journal_pone_0272114 crossref_primary_10_1007_s00429_022_02533_7 crossref_primary_10_1038_s41598_025_98595_8 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_neuroimage_2025_121082 crossref_primary_10_1111_ejn_16127 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_neulet_2025_138283 crossref_primary_10_3390_brainsci11070897 crossref_primary_10_1111_ejn_15480 crossref_primary_10_1371_journal_pone_0299611 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_cortex_2023_08_012 crossref_primary_10_1109_TNSRE_2019_2925904 crossref_primary_10_1523_JNEUROSCI_2189_24_2025 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_brs_2020_11_002 crossref_primary_10_3389_fnins_2021_709368 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_cortex_2022_03_007 |
| Cites_doi | 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2011.12.012 10.1016/j.neures.2006.02.002 10.1152/japplphysiol.00403.2010 10.1016/S0004-9514(14)60659-0 10.1007/s002210050901 10.1016/j.jns.2011.01.004 10.1016/j.clinph.2009.03.001 10.1371/journal.pone.0186007 10.1249/01.MSS.0000139804.02576.6A 10.1016/j.clinph.2012.04.014 10.1097/00124509-200409000-00007 10.1016/S1567-424X(09)70205-3 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2007.05.011 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2005.10.015 10.1016/j.clinph.2012.05.003 10.1016/j.jns.2014.04.012 10.1016/j.clinph.2012.09.018 10.1109/TNSRE.2012.2202692 10.1016/j.dcn.2013.04.001 10.1016/S0013-4694(97)00097-7 10.1016/j.brs.2011.07.006 10.1371/journal.pone.0047582 10.1002/(SICI)1097-4598(199705)20:5<570::AID-MUS5>3.0.CO;2-6 10.1007/s00221-001-0988-2 10.1016/j.clinph.2015.02.001 10.1016/j.neucli.2006.01.005 10.1016/S0140-6736(86)90837-8 10.1113/jphysiol.2002.029454 10.1016/0013-4694(94)90029-9 10.1016/j.clinph.2012.01.010 10.7551/mitpress/6896.001.0001 10.1016/j.clinph.2009.02.164 |
| ContentType | Journal Article |
| Copyright | 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. |
| Copyright_xml | – notice: 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc – notice: 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. |
| DBID | AAYXX CITATION NPM 7QG 7QP 7QR 7TK 7U7 8FD C1K FR3 K9. P64 7X8 |
| DOI | 10.1002/jnr.24319 |
| DatabaseName | CrossRef PubMed Animal Behavior Abstracts Calcium & Calcified Tissue Abstracts Chemoreception Abstracts Neurosciences Abstracts Toxicology Abstracts Technology Research Database Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management Engineering Research Database ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni) Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts MEDLINE - Academic |
| DatabaseTitle | CrossRef PubMed Technology Research Database Toxicology Abstracts Animal Behavior Abstracts ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni) Chemoreception Abstracts Engineering Research Database Calcium & Calcified Tissue Abstracts Neurosciences Abstracts Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management MEDLINE - Academic |
| DatabaseTitleList | Technology Research Database CrossRef PubMed MEDLINE - Academic |
| Database_xml | – sequence: 1 dbid: NPM name: PubMed url: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed sourceTypes: Index Database – sequence: 2 dbid: 7X8 name: MEDLINE - Academic url: https://search.proquest.com/medline sourceTypes: Aggregation Database |
| DeliveryMethod | fulltext_linktorsrc |
| Discipline | Anatomy & Physiology |
| EISSN | 1097-4547 |
| EndPage | 1765 |
| ExternalDocumentID | 30175849 10_1002_jnr_24319 JNR24319 |
| Genre | article Journal Article |
| GroupedDBID | --- -~X .3N .55 .GA .GJ .Y3 05W 0R~ 10A 1L6 1OB 1OC 1ZS 31~ 33P 3O- 3SF 3WU 4.4 4ZD 50Y 50Z 51W 51X 52M 52N 52O 52P 52S 52T 52U 52W 52X 53G 5GY 5VS 66C 702 7PT 8-0 8-1 8-3 8-4 8-5 8UM 930 A03 AAESR AAEVG AAHQN AAMMB AAMNL AANHP AANLZ AAONW AASGY AAXRX AAYCA AAZKR ABCQN ABCUV ABEML ABIJN ABIVO ABJNI ABPVW ACAHQ ACBWZ ACCZN ACGFS ACIWK ACPOU ACPRK ACRPL ACSCC ACXBN ACXQS ACYXJ ADBBV ADEOM ADIZJ ADKYN ADMGS ADNMO ADOZA ADXAS ADZMN AEFGJ AEIGN AEIMD AENEX AEUYR AEYWJ AFBPY AFFNX AFFPM AFGKR AFRAH AFWVQ AFZJQ AGHNM AGQPQ AGXDD AGYGG AHBTC AHMBA AIDQK AIDYY AITYG AIURR AJXKR ALAGY ALMA_UNASSIGNED_HOLDINGS ALUQN ALVPJ AMBMR AMYDB ASPBG ATUGU AUFTA AVWKF AZBYB AZFZN AZVAB BAFTC BDRZF BFHJK BHBCM BMNLL BMXJE BNHUX BROTX BRXPI BY8 C45 CS3 D-E D-F DCZOG DPXWK DR1 DR2 DRFUL DRSTM DU5 EBD EBS EJD EMOBN F00 F01 F04 F5P FEDTE G-S G.N GAKWD GNP GODZA H.T H.X HBH HF~ HGLYW HHY HHZ HVGLF HZ~ IX1 J0M JPC KQQ LATKE LAW LC2 LC3 LEEKS LH4 LITHE LOXES LP6 LP7 LUTES LW6 LYRES M6M MEWTI MK4 MRFUL MRSTM MSFUL MSSTM MXFUL MXSTM N04 N05 N9A NF~ NNB O66 O9- OIG OVD P2P P2W P2X P4D PALCI PQQKQ Q.N Q11 QB0 QRW R.K RIWAO RJQFR ROL RX1 RYL SAMSI SUPJJ SV3 TEORI UB1 V2E W8V W99 WBKPD WIB WIH WIK WJL WNSPC WOHZO WQJ WXSBR WYISQ X7M XG1 XV2 YYP ZGI ZXP ZZTAW ~IA ~WT AAYXX AIQQE CITATION O8X AAHHS ACCFJ AEEZP AEQDE AEUQT AFPWT AIWBW AJBDE NPM RWD RWI WRC WUP 7QG 7QP 7QR 7TK 7U7 8FD C1K FR3 K9. P64 7X8 |
| ID | FETCH-LOGICAL-c3889-bf70ffc5d9ca6635cec1087785eb6868e8be21afa5c1e89b6bcdb951ecebbb13 |
| IEDL.DBID | DRFUL |
| ISICitedReferencesCount | 20 |
| ISICitedReferencesURI | http://www.webofscience.com/api/gateway?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=Summon&SrcAuth=ProQuest&DestLinkType=CitingArticles&DestApp=WOS_CPL&KeyUT=000445732100003&url=https%3A%2F%2Fcvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com%2F%23%21%2Fsearch%3Fho%3Df%26include.ft.matches%3Dt%26l%3Dnull%26q%3D |
| ISSN | 0360-4012 1097-4547 |
| IngestDate | Sun Nov 09 10:20:42 EST 2025 Sat Nov 29 14:43:52 EST 2025 Wed Feb 19 02:43:30 EST 2025 Tue Nov 18 22:42:22 EST 2025 Sat Nov 29 03:44:56 EST 2025 Wed Aug 20 07:27:38 EDT 2025 |
| IsDoiOpenAccess | false |
| IsOpenAccess | true |
| IsPeerReviewed | true |
| IsScholarly | true |
| Issue | 11 |
| Keywords | motor cortex resting motor threshold transcranial magnetic stimulation healthy human motor evoked potentials |
| Language | English |
| License | 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. |
| LinkModel | DirectLink |
| MergedId | FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-c3889-bf70ffc5d9ca6635cec1087785eb6868e8be21afa5c1e89b6bcdb951ecebbb13 |
| Notes | ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 14 ObjectType-Article-2 ObjectType-Feature-1 content type line 23 |
| ORCID | 0000-0002-8681-7681 |
| OpenAccessLink | https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdfdirect/10.1002/jnr.24319 |
| PMID | 30175849 |
| PQID | 2112501166 |
| PQPubID | 1006396 |
| PageCount | 8 |
| ParticipantIDs | proquest_miscellaneous_2099041991 proquest_journals_2112501166 pubmed_primary_30175849 crossref_primary_10_1002_jnr_24319 crossref_citationtrail_10_1002_jnr_24319 wiley_primary_10_1002_jnr_24319_JNR24319 |
| PublicationCentury | 2000 |
| PublicationDate | November 2018 |
| PublicationDateYYYYMMDD | 2018-11-01 |
| PublicationDate_xml | – month: 11 year: 2018 text: November 2018 |
| PublicationDecade | 2010 |
| PublicationPlace | United States |
| PublicationPlace_xml | – name: United States – name: Hoboken |
| PublicationTitle | Journal of neuroscience research |
| PublicationTitleAlternate | J Neurosci Res |
| PublicationYear | 2018 |
| Publisher | Wiley Subscription Services, Inc |
| Publisher_xml | – name: Wiley Subscription Services, Inc |
| References | 2017; 8 2004; 20 2015; 6 2012; 123 2015; 126 2011 1997; 20 2006; 55 2006; 36 2007; 164 2006; 59 2013; 124 2003 2011; 4 1999; 129 2013; 6 2012; 205 2011; 110 2003; 56 1999 2011; 303 1986; 1 2001; 112 2003; 546 2002; 143 2000 2004; 36 2017; 12 1999; 52 1998; 106 2009; 120 2014; 341 2012; 7 1983; 29 1994; 91 2012; 5 2012; 20 e_1_2_10_23_1 e_1_2_10_44_1 e_1_2_10_22_1 e_1_2_10_42_1 e_1_2_10_20_1 Portney L. G. (e_1_2_10_32_1) 2000 e_1_2_10_40_1 Mills K. R. (e_1_2_10_24_1) 1999 Vaseghi B. (e_1_2_10_43_1) 2015; 6 e_1_2_10_2_1 e_1_2_10_3_1 e_1_2_10_19_1 e_1_2_10_6_1 e_1_2_10_16_1 e_1_2_10_39_1 e_1_2_10_5_1 e_1_2_10_17_1 e_1_2_10_38_1 e_1_2_10_8_1 e_1_2_10_14_1 e_1_2_10_7_1 e_1_2_10_15_1 e_1_2_10_36_1 e_1_2_10_12_1 e_1_2_10_35_1 e_1_2_10_9_1 e_1_2_10_13_1 e_1_2_10_34_1 e_1_2_10_10_1 e_1_2_10_11_1 e_1_2_10_31_1 e_1_2_10_30_1 Awiszus F. (e_1_2_10_4_1) 2011; 4 Hashemirad F. (e_1_2_10_18_1) 2017; 8 Keel J. C. (e_1_2_10_21_1) 2001 Oh S. J. (e_1_2_10_29_1) 2003 Qi F. (e_1_2_10_33_1) 2011; 4 Rothwell J. C. (e_1_2_10_37_1) 1999; 52 Thomson R. H. (e_1_2_10_41_1) 2013; 6 e_1_2_10_27_1 e_1_2_10_28_1 e_1_2_10_25_1 e_1_2_10_26_1 |
| References_xml | – year: 2011 – volume: 120 start-page: 1003 issue: 5 year: 2009 end-page: 1008 article-title: Hysteresis effects on the input‐output curve of motor evoked potentials publication-title: Clinical Neurophysiology – volume: 6 start-page: 44 issue: 1 year: 2015 end-page: 51 article-title: Inter‐pulse interval affects the size of single‐pulse TMS‐induced motor evoked potentials: A reliability study publication-title: Basic and Clinical Neuroscience – volume: 143 start-page: 240 issue: 2 year: 2002 end-page: 248 article-title: Two phases of intracortical inhibition revealed by transcranial magnetic threshold tracking publication-title: Experimental Brain Research – volume: 55 start-page: 74 issue: 1 year: 2006 end-page: 77 article-title: Effects of aging on motor cortex excitability publication-title: Neuroscience Research – volume: 20 start-page: 160 issue: 3 year: 2004 end-page: 165 article-title: The maximum‐likelihood strategy for determining transcranial magnetic stimulation motor threshold, using parameter estimation by sequential testing is faster than conventional methods with similar precision publication-title: The Journal of ECT – volume: 106 start-page: 180 issue: 3 year: 1998 end-page: 194 article-title: Clinical applications of motor evoked potentials publication-title: Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology – volume: 303 start-page: 90 issue: 1–2 year: 2011 end-page: 94 article-title: Reliability of TMS‐related measures of tibialis anterior muscle in patients with chronic stroke and healthy subjects publication-title: Journal of the Neurological Sciences – volume: 52 start-page: 97 year: 1999 end-page: 103 article-title: Magnetic stimulation: Motor evoked potentials. The international federation of clinical neurophysiology publication-title: Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology Supplement – volume: 123 start-page: 2319 issue: 11 year: 2012 end-page: 2320 article-title: On relative frequency estimation of transcranial magnetic stimulation motor threshold publication-title: Clinical Neurophysiology: Official Journal of the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology – year: 2003 – volume: 36 start-page: 1 issue: 1 year: 2006 end-page: 7 article-title: Motor threshold in transcranial magnetic stimulation: Comparison of three estimation methods publication-title: Neurophysiologie Clinique = Clinical Neurophysiology – volume: 36 start-page: 1574 issue: 9 year: 2004 end-page: 1579 article-title: Reliability of motor‐evoked potentials during resting and active contraction conditions publication-title: Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise – volume: 164 start-page: 320 issue: 2 year: 2007 end-page: 324 article-title: Reliability of motor‐evoked potentials in the ADM muscle of older adults publication-title: Journal of Neuroscience Methods – volume: 91 start-page: 79 issue: 2 year: 1994 end-page: 92 article-title: Non‐invasive electrical and magnetic stimulation of the brain, spinal cord and roots: Basic principles and procedures for routine clinical application publication-title: Report of an IFCN Committee. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology – volume: 546 start-page: 605 issue: Pt 2 year: 2003 end-page: 613 article-title: Age and sex differences in human motor cortex input‐output characteristics publication-title: The Journal of Physiology – volume: 5 start-page: 526 year: 2012 end-page: 532 article-title: Does second‐scale intertrial interval affect motor evoked potentials induced by single‐pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation? publication-title: Brain Stimulation – start-page: 752 year: 2000 – volume: 123 start-page: 1698 issue: 9 year: 2012 end-page: 1704 article-title: A checklist for assessing the methodological quality of studies using transcranial magnetic stimulation to study the motor system: An international consensus study publication-title: Clinical Neurophysiology: Official Journal of the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology – volume: 205 start-page: 65 issue: 1 year: 2012 end-page: 71 article-title: Comparison of transcranial magnetic stimulation measures obtained at rest and under active conditions and their reliability publication-title: Journal of Neuroscience Methods – volume: 56 start-page: 13 year: 2003 end-page: 23 article-title: TMS and threshold hunting publication-title: Supplements to Clinical Neurophysiology – volume: 110 start-page: 206 issue: 1 year: 2011 end-page: 212 article-title: Male human motor cortex stimulus‐response characteristics are not altered by aging publication-title: Journal of Applied Physiology (Bethesda, MD: 1985) – volume: 12 start-page: e0186007 issue: 10 year: 2017 article-title: Active and resting motor threshold are efficiently obtained with adaptive threshold hunting publication-title: PLoS One – volume: 4 start-page: 50 issue: 1 year: 2011 end-page: 57 article-title: Fast estimation of transcranial magnetic stimulation motor threshold publication-title: BrainStimulation – volume: 59 start-page: 1033 issue: 10 year: 2006 end-page: 1039 article-title: When to use agreement versus reliability measures publication-title: Journal of Clinical Epidemiology – volume: 8 start-page: 43 issue: 1 year: 2017 end-page: 50 article-title: Reliability of motor evoked potentials induced by transcranial magnetic stimulation: the effects of initial motor evoked potentials removal publication-title: Basic and Clinical Neuroscience – volume: 126 start-page: 1071 issue: 6 year: 2015 end-page: 1107 article-title: Non‐invasive electrical and magnetic stimulation of the brain, spinal cord, roots and peripheral nerves: Basic principles and procedures for routine clinical and research application. An updated report from an I.F.C.N. Committee publication-title: Clinical Neurophysiology – volume: 120 start-page: 987 issue: 5 year: 2009 end-page: 993 article-title: An initial transient‐state and reliable measures of corticospinal excitability in TMS studies publication-title: Clinical Neurophysiology – volume: 129 start-page: 317 issue: 2 year: 1999 end-page: 324 article-title: Characterisation of paired‐pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation conditions yielding intracortical inhibition or I‐wave facilitation using a threshold‐hunting paradigm publication-title: Experimental Brain Research – volume: 29 start-page: 3 issue: 1 year: 1983 end-page: 9 article-title: Using surface electromyography in physiotherapy research publication-title: Australian Journal of Physiotherapy – start-page: 74 year: 1999 end-page: 77 – volume: 20 start-page: 617 issue: 5 year: 2012 end-page: 625 article-title: The effect of coil type and navigation on the reliability of transcranial magnetic stimulation publication-title: IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering: A Publication of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society – volume: 124 start-page: 708 issue: 4 year: 2013 end-page: 712 article-title: A comparison of relative‐frequency and threshold‐hunting methods to determine stimulus intensity in transcranial magnetic stimulation publication-title: Clinical Neurophysiology: Official Journal of the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology – volume: 4 start-page: 58 issue: 1 year: 2011 end-page: 59 article-title: Fast estimation of transcranial magnetic stimulation motor threshold: Is it safe? publication-title: BrainStimulation – volume: 20 start-page: 570 issue: 5 year: 1997 end-page: 576 article-title: Corticomotor threshold to magnetic stimulation: Normal values and repeatability publication-title: Muscle & Nerve – volume: 1 start-page: 307 issue: 8476 year: 1986 end-page: 310 article-title: Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement publication-title: Lancet (London, England) – volume: 341 start-page: 105 issue: 1–2 year: 2014 end-page: 109 article-title: Reliability of transcranial magnetic stimulation induced corticomotor excitability measurements for a hand muscle in healthy and chronic stroke subjects publication-title: Journal of the Neurological Sciences – volume: 7 start-page: e47582 issue: 10 year: 2012 article-title: A higher number of TMS‐elicited MEP from a combined hotspot improves intra‐ and inter‐session reliability of the upper limb muscles in healthy individuals publication-title: PLoS One – volume: 112 start-page: 720 issue: 4 year: 2001 article-title: A safety screening questionnaire for transcranial magnetic stimulation – volume: 6 start-page: 576 issue: 4 year: 2013 end-page: 581 article-title: Blood oxygenation changes modulated by coil orientation during prefrontal transcranial magnetic stimulation publication-title: BrainStimulation – volume: 123 start-page: 858 issue: 5 year: 2012 end-page: 882 article-title: A practical guide to diagnostic transcranial magnetic stimulation: Report of an IFCN committee publication-title: Clinical Neurophysiology – volume: 6 start-page: 176 year: 2013 end-page: 194 article-title: Can transcranial electrical stimulation improve learning difficulties in atypical brain development? A future possibility for cognitive training publication-title: Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience – ident: e_1_2_10_28_1 doi: 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2011.12.012 – ident: e_1_2_10_30_1 doi: 10.1016/j.neures.2006.02.002 – ident: e_1_2_10_40_1 doi: 10.1152/japplphysiol.00403.2010 – volume-title: Clinical electromyography: Nerve conduction studies year: 2003 ident: e_1_2_10_29_1 – ident: e_1_2_10_16_1 doi: 10.1016/S0004-9514(14)60659-0 – ident: e_1_2_10_7_1 doi: 10.1007/s002210050901 – volume: 6 start-page: 576 issue: 4 year: 2013 ident: e_1_2_10_41_1 article-title: Blood oxygenation changes modulated by coil orientation during prefrontal transcranial magnetic stimulation publication-title: BrainStimulation – ident: e_1_2_10_10_1 doi: 10.1016/j.jns.2011.01.004 – ident: e_1_2_10_27_1 doi: 10.1016/j.clinph.2009.03.001 – ident: e_1_2_10_2_1 doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0186007 – ident: e_1_2_10_20_1 doi: 10.1249/01.MSS.0000139804.02576.6A – start-page: 720 volume-title: Clinical Neurophysiology year: 2001 ident: e_1_2_10_21_1 – start-page: 752 volume-title: Foundations of clinical research applications to practice year: 2000 ident: e_1_2_10_32_1 – volume: 6 start-page: 44 issue: 1 year: 2015 ident: e_1_2_10_43_1 article-title: Inter‐pulse interval affects the size of single‐pulse TMS‐induced motor evoked potentials: A reliability study publication-title: Basic and Clinical Neuroscience – ident: e_1_2_10_5_1 doi: 10.1016/j.clinph.2012.04.014 – ident: e_1_2_10_26_1 doi: 10.1097/00124509-200409000-00007 – ident: e_1_2_10_3_1 doi: 10.1016/S1567-424X(09)70205-3 – ident: e_1_2_10_12_1 doi: 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2007.05.011 – ident: e_1_2_10_13_1 doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2005.10.015 – ident: e_1_2_10_11_1 doi: 10.1016/j.clinph.2012.05.003 – ident: e_1_2_10_23_1 doi: 10.1016/j.jns.2014.04.012 – ident: e_1_2_10_39_1 doi: 10.1016/j.clinph.2012.09.018 – start-page: 74 volume-title: Motor effects of brain stimulation. Magnetic stimulation of the human nervous system year: 1999 ident: e_1_2_10_24_1 – ident: e_1_2_10_15_1 doi: 10.1109/TNSRE.2012.2202692 – ident: e_1_2_10_22_1 doi: 10.1016/j.dcn.2013.04.001 – volume: 8 start-page: 43 issue: 1 year: 2017 ident: e_1_2_10_18_1 article-title: Reliability of motor evoked potentials induced by transcranial magnetic stimulation: the effects of initial motor evoked potentials removal publication-title: Basic and Clinical Neuroscience – ident: e_1_2_10_36_1 doi: 10.1016/S0013-4694(97)00097-7 – volume: 4 start-page: 58 issue: 1 year: 2011 ident: e_1_2_10_4_1 article-title: Fast estimation of transcranial magnetic stimulation motor threshold: Is it safe? publication-title: BrainStimulation – ident: e_1_2_10_19_1 doi: 10.1016/j.brs.2011.07.006 – volume: 4 start-page: 50 issue: 1 year: 2011 ident: e_1_2_10_33_1 article-title: Fast estimation of transcranial magnetic stimulation motor threshold publication-title: BrainStimulation – ident: e_1_2_10_8_1 doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0047582 – ident: e_1_2_10_25_1 doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-4598(199705)20:5<570::AID-MUS5>3.0.CO;2-6 – ident: e_1_2_10_14_1 doi: 10.1007/s00221-001-0988-2 – ident: e_1_2_10_35_1 doi: 10.1016/j.clinph.2015.02.001 – ident: e_1_2_10_6_1 – ident: e_1_2_10_42_1 doi: 10.1016/j.neucli.2006.01.005 – volume: 52 start-page: 97 year: 1999 ident: e_1_2_10_37_1 article-title: Magnetic stimulation: Motor evoked potentials. The international federation of clinical neurophysiology publication-title: Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology Supplement – ident: e_1_2_10_9_1 doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(86)90837-8 – ident: e_1_2_10_31_1 doi: 10.1113/jphysiol.2002.029454 – ident: e_1_2_10_34_1 doi: 10.1016/0013-4694(94)90029-9 – ident: e_1_2_10_17_1 doi: 10.1016/j.clinph.2012.01.010 – ident: e_1_2_10_44_1 doi: 10.7551/mitpress/6896.001.0001 – ident: e_1_2_10_38_1 doi: 10.1016/j.clinph.2009.02.164 |
| SSID | ssj0009953 |
| Score | 2.3689315 |
| Snippet | Several methods can be used to determine the resting motor threshold (RMT) and by that recording transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) induced motor evoked... |
| SourceID | proquest pubmed crossref wiley |
| SourceType | Aggregation Database Index Database Enrichment Source Publisher |
| StartPage | 1758 |
| SubjectTerms | Amplitudes Correlation coefficient Correlation coefficients Evoked potentials healthy human Hunting Magnetic fields motor cortex Motor evoked potentials Motors Parameter estimation Pests Recording Reliability resting motor threshold Stimulators Test procedures Transcranial magnetic stimulation |
| Title | Comparison of Rossini–Rothwell and adaptive threshold‐hunting methods on the stability of TMS induced motor evoked potentials amplitudes |
| URI | https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002%2Fjnr.24319 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30175849 https://www.proquest.com/docview/2112501166 https://www.proquest.com/docview/2099041991 |
| Volume | 96 |
| WOSCitedRecordID | wos000445732100003&url=https%3A%2F%2Fcvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com%2F%23%21%2Fsearch%3Fho%3Df%26include.ft.matches%3Dt%26l%3Dnull%26q%3D |
| hasFullText | 1 |
| inHoldings | 1 |
| isFullTextHit | |
| isPrint | |
| journalDatabaseRights | – providerCode: PRVWIB databaseName: Wiley Online Library - Journals customDbUrl: eissn: 1097-4547 dateEnd: 99991231 omitProxy: false ssIdentifier: ssj0009953 issn: 0360-4012 databaseCode: DRFUL dateStart: 19960101 isFulltext: true titleUrlDefault: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com providerName: Wiley-Blackwell |
| link | http://cvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwpV1Lb9QwEB61Ww5ceBXKQqkMQqiX0Lyc2OJUFVYIlRVaFrS3yK-I5ZGsNttKvfUHcEDiH_aXMBNnU1WAhMQtj4ltxTP2N_b4G4CnRiSEEsLAyohSmEkZqFyLIMwMlyUvM9uuQ348zsdjMZvJdxvwYn0WxvND9AtuZBnteE0GrnRzcEka-rlaPo9x-pObsBWj3vIBbL2cjD4cX3LuSk9CmWBT0I2I18RCYXzQf3x1OvoNY16FrO2cM7r5X629BTc6qMkOvW7chg1X3YHtwwrd7G9n7Blrgz_bVfVt-H7U5yNkdckm2NZ5Nb84_znBnqT1PaYqy5RVCxoe2Qo1oKGNq4vzH598sgnmc1E3DEtAUMkQdbZxt2dU3vTte4bOP6qRZagb9ZK50_oL3izqFYUroQ0wRbHtxLTZ3IXp6NX06HXQJWoITEJRUrrMw7I03EqjCMEYZyIiGhTc6Uxkwgnt4kiVipvICakzbaxGaOeM01pHyT0YVHXl7gPjOHzYJDdCx2GqE6W4cGnGc4PPnE7tEPbX3VWYjsSccml8LTz9clzgjy7aHz2EJ73owjN3_Elod93nRWe8TYE-MQLDKMqyITzuX6PZ0V6Kqlx9gjK0oZhS3NgQdryu9LXgmIleWIqF77cq8ffqizfjSXvx4N9FH8J1BG3Cn4fchcFqeeIewTVzupo3yz3YzGdir7OEX-bzEFY |
| linkProvider | Wiley-Blackwell |
| linkToHtml | http://cvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwpV1Lb9QwEB6VFgku5VEe2xYwCKFe0uYdW-JSFVYFtiu0LKi3yK-IbWmy2mwr9dYfwAGJf9hfwkycTVUBEhK3PBzbimfsb8bjbwBeah4RSvA9IwJKYSaEJzPFPT_ViSiSIjWNH_LLIBsO-eGh-LgErxdnYRw_ROdwI81o5mtScHJI71yxhh6Vs-0Q1z9xA1ZiFCOU75U3o_7nwRXprnAslBH2Be2IcMEs5Ic73cfX16PfQOZ1zNosOv07_9fdu7Dagk2266TjHizZ8j6s7ZZoaJ-cs1esCf9s_Opr8H2vy0jIqoKNsLOTcnJ58XOEY0kePiZLw6SRU5og2RxloKatq8uLH19dugnmslHXDGtAWMkQdzaRt-dU3_jgE0PzHwXJMJSOasbsWXWMN9NqTgFLqAVMUnQ7cW3WD2Dcfzve2_faVA2ejihOShWZXxQ6MUJLwjDa6oCoBnliVcpTbrmyYSALmejAcqFSpY1CcGe1VUoF0UNYLqvSPgaW4ARiokxzFfqxiqRMuI3TJNP4zKrY9GBrMV65bmnMKZvGt9wRMIc5_ui8-dE9eNEVnTrujj8V2lwMet6qb52jVYzQMAjStAfPu9eoeLSbIktbnWIZ2lKMKXKsB4-csHSt4KyJdliMlW81MvH35vP3w1Fzsf7vRZ_Brf3xwSAfvBt-2IDbCOG4Ox25Ccvz2al9Ajf12XxSz562CvELsFoTXg |
| linkToPdf | http://cvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwpV1Lb9QwEB6VLUJceBXotgUMQqiXtHnHlrhULSsey6paFtRb5FfEQklWm22l3voDOCDxD_tLmImzqSpAQuKWx8S24hn7G3v8DcBzzSNCCb5nREApzITwZKa456c6EUVSpKZZh_w0zEYjfnQkDlfg5fIsjOOH6BbcyDKa8ZoM3M5MsXvJGvqlnO-EOP-Ja7AaUxKZHqwejAcfh5eku8KxUEbYFvQjwiWzkB_udh9fnY9-A5lXMWsz6Qxu_19z78CtFmyyPacdd2HFlvdgba9ER_vbGXvBmvDPZl19Db7vdxkJWVWwMTZ2Wk4vzn-OsS9phY_J0jBp5IwGSLZAHahp6-ri_Mdnl26CuWzUNcMSEFYyxJ1N5O0ZlTd5_4Gh-4-KZBhqRzVn9rT6ijezakEBS2gFTFJ0O3Ft1vdhMng12X_ttakaPB1RnJQqMr8odGKEloRhtNUBUQ3yxKqUp9xyZcNAFjLRgeVCpUobheDOaquUCqIH0Cur0q4DS3AAMVGmuQr9WEVSJtzGaZJpfGZVbPqwveyvXLc05pRN4zh3BMxhjj86b350H551ojPH3fEnoa1lp-et-dY5esUIDYMgTfvwtHuNhke7KbK01QnK0JZiTJFjfXjolKWrBUdN9MNiLHy70Ym_V5-_HY2bi41_F30CNw4PBvnwzejdJtxEBMfd4cgt6C3mJ_YRXNeni2k9f9zawy8h0RLZ |
| openUrl | ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparison+of+Rossini%E2%80%93Rothwell+and+adaptive+threshold%E2%80%90hunting+methods+on+the+stability+of+TMS+induced+motor+evoked+potentials+amplitudes&rft.jtitle=Journal+of+neuroscience+research&rft.au=Dissanayaka%2C+Thusharika&rft.au=Zoghi%2C+Maryam&rft.au=Farrell%2C+Michael&rft.au=Egan%2C+Gary&rft.date=2018-11-01&rft.issn=0360-4012&rft.eissn=1097-4547&rft.volume=96&rft.issue=11&rft.spage=1758&rft.epage=1765&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002%2Fjnr.24319&rft.externalDBID=10.1002%252Fjnr.24319&rft.externalDocID=JNR24319 |
| thumbnail_l | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/lc.gif&issn=0360-4012&client=summon |
| thumbnail_m | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/mc.gif&issn=0360-4012&client=summon |
| thumbnail_s | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/sc.gif&issn=0360-4012&client=summon |