Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40672464›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in neurology2025

Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for enhancing motor function after spinal cord injury: a narrative review.

Francisco Benavides, Mary Grace Shine, Filip Stefanovic, Robert Chen, Hang Jin Jo

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in neurology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Francisco BenavidesDepartment of Rehabilitation Science, School of Public Health and Health Professions, University at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY, United States.
Mary Grace ShineDepartment of Rehabilitation Science, School of Public Health and Health Professions, University at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY, United States.
Filip StefanovicDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, School of Engineering and Applied Sciences, University at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY, United States.
Robert ChenDivision of Neurology, Department of Medicine, Krembil Research Institute, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Hang Jin JoDepartment of Rehabilitation Science, School of Public Health and Health Professions, University at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Spinal cord injury (SCI) often leads to disabilities that significantly impact quality of life, highlighting the need for effective rehabilitation strategies. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) has emerged as a promising neuromodulatory approach to enhance neuronal plasticity and promote motor recovery following SCI. This narrative review examines the current state of evidence regarding the therapeutic use of rTMS for motor function recovery after SCI and outlines key methodological considerations to guide future research. To address these aims, we summarize various rTMS techniques and evaluate their overall efficacy in improving motor function in individuals with SCI. Among the fourteen studies reviewed, early rTMS protocols primarily utilized low-frequency stimulation, whereas more recent approaches have adopted higher frequencies and more complex patterned protocols. Despite considerable heterogeneity in stimulation parameters, most studies reported beneficial effects of rTMS, including reduction in spasticity and improvements in voluntary motor function of both upper and lower limbs. These findings demonstrate that rTMS holds promise as an effective tool for SCI rehabilitation, with limited to moderate evidence supporting reductions in spasticity, increased muscle strength, and enhanced functional outcomes. However, many of these findings are derived from small sample sizes, varied protocols, and studies lacking rigorous control conditions. The review emphasizes the need for standardized functional and electrophysiological assessments to systematically evaluate motor outcomes following rTMS interventions. Additionally, larger, well-controlled clinical trials incorporating consistent physical therapy protocols are essential to confirm the efficacy of rTMS.

Indexed as

iTBSmotor rehabilitationneuroplasticityrepetitive TMSspinal cord injury

Identifiers

PMID40672464
PMCPMC12263632

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.