ArticleScientific reports2021
Sham-derived effects and the minimal reliability of theta burst stimulation.
Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
22 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 53 citations in OpenAlex.
- Retest reliability of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation over the healthy human motor cortex: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2023Pooled it
- Accelerated sequential bilateral theta-burst stimulation in major depression: an open trial.European archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience · 2024Trial
- Reliability of resting-state EEG modulation by continuous and intermittent theta burst stimulation of the primary motor cortex: a sham-controlled study.Scientific reports · 2023Trial
- Complexity of resting cortical activity predicts neurophysiological responses to theta-burst stimulation but fails to generalize: A rigorous machine-learning approach.PLoS computational biology · 2026Article
- The Influence of M1 and DLPFC iTBS on BCI Performance: A TMS and fNIRS Study.Translational stroke research · 2026Article
- Complexity of Resting Cortical Activity Predicts Neurophysiological Responses to Theta- Burst Stimulation but Fails to Generalize: A Rigorous Machine-Learning Approach.Research square · 2025Article
- Height-dependent variation in corticospinal excitability modulation after active but not sham intermittent theta burst stimulation.IBRO neuroscience reports · 2025Article
- Treating Depression With Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation: A Clinician's Guide.The American journal of psychiatry · 2025Review
- Assessing Neuromodulation Effects of Theta Burst Stimulation to the Prefrontal Cortex Using Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Electroencephalography (TMS-EEG).The European journal of neuroscience · 2025Article
- Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for enhancing motor function after spinal cord injury: a narrative review.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Review
- Functional MRI reveals regional changes of brain activity in rats following longitudinal focal high-density theta burst stimulation (hdTBS).Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2025Article
- Continuous theta burst stimulation at 30 hz does not modulate cortical excitability in a sham-controlled study.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Cerebellar Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation: A Frontier in Chronic Pain Therapy.Journal of personalized medicine · 2024Review
- Non-invasive neuromodulation of the right temporoparietal junction using theta-burst stimulation in functional neurological disorder.BMJ neurology open · 2024Article
- Assessing the mechanisms of brain plasticity by transcranial magnetic stimulation.Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2023Review
- The behavioral and neural effects of parietal theta burst stimulation on the grasp network are stronger during a grasping task than at rest.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2023Article
- Neuromodulatory effects and reproducibility of the most widely used repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation protocols.PloS one · 2023Article
- Phase matters when there is power: Phasic modulation of corticospinal excitability occurs at high amplitude sensorimotor mu-oscillations.Neuroimage. Reports · 2022Article
- Adding a Second iTBS Block in 15 or 60 Min Time Interval Does Not Increase iTBS Effects on Motor Cortex Excitability and the Responder Rates.Brain sciences · 2022Article
- A little goes a long way: Neurobiological effects of low intensity rTMS and implications for mechanisms of rTMS.Current research in neurobiology · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Theta-burst stimulation (TBS) is a patterned form of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) that has been used to induce long-term modulation (plasticity) of corticospinal excitability in a drastically shorter duration protocol than conventional rTMS protocols. In this study we tested the reliability of the effects of two well defined TBS protocols, continuous TBS (cTBS) and intermittent TBS (iTBS), especially in relation to sham TBS, within and across the same 24 participants. All TBS protocols were repeated after approximately 1 month to assess the magnitude and reliability of the modulatory effects of each TBS protocol. Baseline and post-TBS changes in motor evoked potentials (MEP-measure of corticospinal excitability) amplitudes were compared across the cTBS, iTBS and sham TBS protocols and between the initial and retest visits. Overall, across participants, at the initial visit, iTBS facilitated MEPs as compared to baseline excitability, with sham eliciting the same effect. cTBS did not show a significant suppression of excitability compared to baseline MEPs at either visit, and even facilitated MEPs above baseline excitability at a single time point during the repeat visit. Otherwise, effects of TBS were generally diminished in the repeat visit, with iTBS and sham TBS replicating facilitation of MEPs above baseline excitability at similar time points. However, no protocol demonstrated consistent intra-individual modulation of corticospinal excitability upon retest. As the first study to test both iTBS and cTBS against sham TBS across repeat visits, our findings challenge the efficacy and reliability of TBS protocols and emphasize the importance of accounting for sham effects of TBS. Furthermore, given that therapeutic effects of TBS are hypothetically derived from consistent and repeated modulation of brain activity, the non-replicability of plasticity and sham effects call into question these basic mechanisms.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.