{"title":"经颅磁刺激诱发的MEPs在会话内、会话内和会话间的可靠性:峰对峰振幅与曲线下面积的关系","authors":"Mona Malekahmad , Ashlyn Frazer , Maryam Zoghi , Shapour Jaberzadeh","doi":"10.1016/j.neulet.2025.138283","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Corticospinal excitability (CSE) is the responsiveness of the corticospinal and brain-to-muscle pathway, assessed using motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) via transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). It provides crucial insight into motor control, neuroplasticity, and neurological conditions. The use of TMS-induced MEPs in clinical and research contexts is contingent upon their intra- and intersession reliability. This study specifically aimed to assess the reliability of two distinct methods for quantifying MEP size: peak-to-peak amplitude (PPA) and the area under the curve (AUC). Establishing the agreement between these quantification methods is critical for ensuring consistent measurements by the same assessor, especially in pre- and post-test designs conducted within and between sessions. Twelve healthy participants volunteered for this study. Thirty MEPs were recorded from each participant using a single-pulse TMS set at 120% of the resting motor threshold (RMT) over two sessions. The first session consisted of two tests (T1 and T2) with a 20-minute rest interval between sets. The second session included one set of tests (T3). Test-retest reliability of MEP amplitude and AUC were assessed using one-way ANOVA and Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC). A one-way ANOVA revealed no significant effect of time on MEP amplitude or AUC value, indicating agreement between sessions. The ICC demonstrated significant intra- and inter-session reliability for PPA. However, correlations between T1-T3 were weak for AUC values. In conclusion, this study suggests that PPA a more reliable measurement than AUC for assessing changes in CSE. Future investigations should explore the reliability of the AUC method in clinical settings or research protocols.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":19290,"journal":{"name":"Neuroscience Letters","volume":"862 ","pages":"Article 138283"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Intra-rater within- and between-session reliability of TMS-induced MEPs: peak-to-peak amplitude versus area under the curve\",\"authors\":\"Mona Malekahmad , Ashlyn Frazer , Maryam Zoghi , Shapour Jaberzadeh\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.neulet.2025.138283\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Corticospinal excitability (CSE) is the responsiveness of the corticospinal and brain-to-muscle pathway, assessed using motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) via transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). It provides crucial insight into motor control, neuroplasticity, and neurological conditions. The use of TMS-induced MEPs in clinical and research contexts is contingent upon their intra- and intersession reliability. This study specifically aimed to assess the reliability of two distinct methods for quantifying MEP size: peak-to-peak amplitude (PPA) and the area under the curve (AUC). Establishing the agreement between these quantification methods is critical for ensuring consistent measurements by the same assessor, especially in pre- and post-test designs conducted within and between sessions. Twelve healthy participants volunteered for this study. Thirty MEPs were recorded from each participant using a single-pulse TMS set at 120% of the resting motor threshold (RMT) over two sessions. The first session consisted of two tests (T1 and T2) with a 20-minute rest interval between sets. The second session included one set of tests (T3). Test-retest reliability of MEP amplitude and AUC were assessed using one-way ANOVA and Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC). A one-way ANOVA revealed no significant effect of time on MEP amplitude or AUC value, indicating agreement between sessions. The ICC demonstrated significant intra- and inter-session reliability for PPA. However, correlations between T1-T3 were weak for AUC values. In conclusion, this study suggests that PPA a more reliable measurement than AUC for assessing changes in CSE. Future investigations should explore the reliability of the AUC method in clinical settings or research protocols.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19290,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Neuroscience Letters\",\"volume\":\"862 \",\"pages\":\"Article 138283\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Neuroscience Letters\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304394025001715\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"NEUROSCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neuroscience Letters","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304394025001715","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Intra-rater within- and between-session reliability of TMS-induced MEPs: peak-to-peak amplitude versus area under the curve
Corticospinal excitability (CSE) is the responsiveness of the corticospinal and brain-to-muscle pathway, assessed using motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) via transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). It provides crucial insight into motor control, neuroplasticity, and neurological conditions. The use of TMS-induced MEPs in clinical and research contexts is contingent upon their intra- and intersession reliability. This study specifically aimed to assess the reliability of two distinct methods for quantifying MEP size: peak-to-peak amplitude (PPA) and the area under the curve (AUC). Establishing the agreement between these quantification methods is critical for ensuring consistent measurements by the same assessor, especially in pre- and post-test designs conducted within and between sessions. Twelve healthy participants volunteered for this study. Thirty MEPs were recorded from each participant using a single-pulse TMS set at 120% of the resting motor threshold (RMT) over two sessions. The first session consisted of two tests (T1 and T2) with a 20-minute rest interval between sets. The second session included one set of tests (T3). Test-retest reliability of MEP amplitude and AUC were assessed using one-way ANOVA and Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC). A one-way ANOVA revealed no significant effect of time on MEP amplitude or AUC value, indicating agreement between sessions. The ICC demonstrated significant intra- and inter-session reliability for PPA. However, correlations between T1-T3 were weak for AUC values. In conclusion, this study suggests that PPA a more reliable measurement than AUC for assessing changes in CSE. Future investigations should explore the reliability of the AUC method in clinical settings or research protocols.
期刊介绍:
Neuroscience Letters is devoted to the rapid publication of short, high-quality papers of interest to the broad community of neuroscientists. Only papers which will make a significant addition to the literature in the field will be published. Papers in all areas of neuroscience - molecular, cellular, developmental, systems, behavioral and cognitive, as well as computational - will be considered for publication. Submission of laboratory investigations that shed light on disease mechanisms is encouraged. Special Issues, edited by Guest Editors to cover new and rapidly-moving areas, will include invited mini-reviews. Occasional mini-reviews in especially timely areas will be considered for publication, without invitation, outside of Special Issues; these un-solicited mini-reviews can be submitted without invitation but must be of very high quality. Clinical studies will also be published if they provide new information about organization or actions of the nervous system, or provide new insights into the neurobiology of disease. NSL does not publish case reports.