Mikkel Malling Beck, Marieke Heyl, Louise Mejer, Mikkel C. Vinding, Lasse Christiansen, Leo Tomasevic, Hartwig Roman Siebner
{"title":"Methodological Choices Matter: A Systematic Comparison of TMS-EEG Studies Targeting the Primary Motor Cortex","authors":"Mikkel Malling Beck, Marieke Heyl, Louise Mejer, Mikkel C. Vinding, Lasse Christiansen, Leo Tomasevic, Hartwig Roman Siebner","doi":"10.1002/hbm.70048","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) triggers time-locked cortical activity that can be recorded with electroencephalography (EEG). Transcranial evoked potentials (TEPs) are widely used to probe brain responses to TMS. Here, we systematically reviewed 137 published experiments that studied TEPs elicited from TMS to the human primary motor cortex (M1) in healthy individuals to investigate the impact of methodological choices. We scrutinized prevalent methodological choices and assessed how consistently they were reported in published papers. We extracted amplitudes and latencies from reported TEPs and compared specific TEP peaks and components between studies using distinct methods. Reporting of methodological details was overall sufficient, but some relevant information regarding the TMS settings and the recording and preprocessing of EEG data were missing in more than 25% of the included experiments. The published TEP latencies and amplitudes confirm the “prototypical” TEP waveform following stimulation of M1, comprising distinct N15, P30, N45, P60, N100, and P180 peaks. However, variations in amplitude were evident across studies. Higher stimulation intensities were associated with overall larger TEP amplitudes. Active noise masking during TMS generally resulted in lower TEP amplitudes compared to no or passive masking but did not specifically impact those TEP peaks linked to long-latency sensory processing. Studies implementing independent component analysis (ICA) for artifact removal generally reported lower TEP magnitudes. In summary, some aspects of reporting practices could be improved in future TEP studies to enable replication. Methodological choices, including TMS intensity and the use of noise masking or ICA, introduce systematic differences in reported TEP amplitudes. Further investigation into the significance of these and other methodological factors and their interactions is warranted.</p>","PeriodicalId":13019,"journal":{"name":"Human Brain Mapping","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11512442/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human Brain Mapping","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/hbm.70048","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NEUROIMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) triggers time-locked cortical activity that can be recorded with electroencephalography (EEG). Transcranial evoked potentials (TEPs) are widely used to probe brain responses to TMS. Here, we systematically reviewed 137 published experiments that studied TEPs elicited from TMS to the human primary motor cortex (M1) in healthy individuals to investigate the impact of methodological choices. We scrutinized prevalent methodological choices and assessed how consistently they were reported in published papers. We extracted amplitudes and latencies from reported TEPs and compared specific TEP peaks and components between studies using distinct methods. Reporting of methodological details was overall sufficient, but some relevant information regarding the TMS settings and the recording and preprocessing of EEG data were missing in more than 25% of the included experiments. The published TEP latencies and amplitudes confirm the “prototypical” TEP waveform following stimulation of M1, comprising distinct N15, P30, N45, P60, N100, and P180 peaks. However, variations in amplitude were evident across studies. Higher stimulation intensities were associated with overall larger TEP amplitudes. Active noise masking during TMS generally resulted in lower TEP amplitudes compared to no or passive masking but did not specifically impact those TEP peaks linked to long-latency sensory processing. Studies implementing independent component analysis (ICA) for artifact removal generally reported lower TEP magnitudes. In summary, some aspects of reporting practices could be improved in future TEP studies to enable replication. Methodological choices, including TMS intensity and the use of noise masking or ICA, introduce systematic differences in reported TEP amplitudes. Further investigation into the significance of these and other methodological factors and their interactions is warranted.
期刊介绍:
Human Brain Mapping publishes peer-reviewed basic, clinical, technical, and theoretical research in the interdisciplinary and rapidly expanding field of human brain mapping. The journal features research derived from non-invasive brain imaging modalities used to explore the spatial and temporal organization of the neural systems supporting human behavior. Imaging modalities of interest include positron emission tomography, event-related potentials, electro-and magnetoencephalography, magnetic resonance imaging, and single-photon emission tomography. Brain mapping research in both normal and clinical populations is encouraged.
Article formats include Research Articles, Review Articles, Clinical Case Studies, and Technique, as well as Technological Developments, Theoretical Articles, and Synthetic Reviews. Technical advances, such as novel brain imaging methods, analyses for detecting or localizing neural activity, synergistic uses of multiple imaging modalities, and strategies for the design of behavioral paradigms and neural-systems modeling are of particular interest. The journal endorses the propagation of methodological standards and encourages database development in the field of human brain mapping.