The DOI matches its Crossref record; 39 of the 39 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The effect of stimulus intensity on brain responses evoked by transcranial magnetic stimulation
Open accessAbstract
To better understand the neuronal effects of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), we studied how the TMS‐evoked brain responses depend on stimulation intensity. We measured electroencephalographic (EEG) responses to motor‐cortex TMS, estimated the intensity dependence of the overall brain response, and compared it to a theoretical model for the intensity dependence of the TMS‐evoked neuronal activity. Left and right motor cortices of seven volunteers were stimulated at intensities of 60, 80, 100, and 120% of the motor threshold (MT). A figure‐of‐eight coil (diameter of each loop 4 cm) was used for focal stimulation. EEG was recorded with 60 scalp electrodes. The intensity of 60% of MT was sufficient to produce a distinct global mean field amplitude (GMFA) waveform in all subjects. The GMFA, reflecting the overall brain response, was composed of four peaks, appearing at 15 ± 5 msec (Peak I), 44 ± 10 msec (II), 102 ± 18 msec (III), and 185 ± 13 msec (IV). The peak amplitudes depended nonlinearly on intensity. This nonlinearity was most pronounced for Peaks I and II, whose amplitudes appeared to sample the initial part of the sigmoid‐shaped curve modeling the strength of TMS‐evoked neuronal activity. Although the response amplitude increased with stimulus intensity, scalp distributions of the potential were relatively similar for the four intensities. The results imply that TMS is able to evoke measurable brain activity at low stimulus intensities, probably significantly below 60% of MT. The shape of the response‐stimulus intensity curve may be an indicator of the activation state of the brain. Hum. Brain Mapp. 21:154–164, 2004. © 2004 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
NON-INVASIVE MAGNETIC STIMULATION OF HUMAN MOTOR CORTEX
Barker, A. T., Jalinous, R., & Freeston, I. L. (1985) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(85)92413-4 · Cited by 4,460
Reference-free identification of components of checkerboard-evoked multichannel potential fields
Lehmann, D., & Skrandies, W. (1980) · Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology · doi:10.1016/0013-4694(80)90419-8 · Cited by 1,552
Interhemispheric inhibition of the human motor cortex.
Ferbert, A., Priori, A., Rothwell, J. C., Day, B. L., Colebatch, J. G., & Marsden, C. D. (1992) · The Journal of Physiology · doi:10.1113/jphysiol.1992.sp019243 · Cited by 1,486
Input-output properties and gain changes in the human corticospinal pathway
Devanne, H., Lavoie, B. A., & Capaday, C. (1997) · Experimental Brain Research · doi:10.1007/pl00005641 · Cited by 819
Neuronal responses to magnetic stimulation reveal cortical reactivity and connectivity
Ilmoniemi, R. J., Virtanen, J., Ruohonen, J., Karhu, J., Aronen, H. J., Näätänen, R., & Katila, T. (1997) · NeuroReport · doi:10.1097/00001756-199711100-00024 · Cited by 785
Self-citationPaus, T., Jech, R., Thompson, C. J., Comeau, R., Peters, T., & Evans, A. C. (1997) · The Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.17-09-03178.1997 · Cited by 700
Human motor evoked responses to paired transcranial magnetic stimuli
Valls-Solé, J., Pascual-Leone, A., Wassermann, E. M., & Hallett, M. (1992) · Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology/Evoked Potentials Section · doi:10.1016/0168-5597(92)90048-g · Cited by 687
Nakamura, H., Kitagawa, H., Kawaguchi, Y., & Tsuji, H. (1997) · The Journal of Physiology · doi:10.1113/jphysiol.1997.sp021905 · Cited by 627
Variation in the response to transcranial magnetic brain stimulation in the general population
Wassermann, E. (2002) · Clinical Neurophysiology · doi:10.1016/s1388-2457(02)00144-x · Cited by 462
Imaging human intra-cerebral connectivity by PET during TMS
Fox, P., Ingham, R., George, M. S., Mayberg, H., Ingham, J., Roby, J., Martin, C., & Jerabek, P. (1997) · NeuroReport · doi:10.1097/00001756-199708180-00027 · Cited by 395
Cited by
Rossi, S., Hallett, M., Rossini, P. M., & Pascual-Leone, A. (2009) · Clinical Neurophysiology · doi:10.1016/j.clinph.2009.08.016 · Cited by 5,367
Rossini, P. M., Burke, D., Chen, R., Cohen, L. G., Daskalakis, Z., Di Iorio, R., Di Lazzaro, V., Ferreri, F., Fitzgerald, P. B., George, M. S., et al. (2015) · Clinical Neurophysiology · doi:10.1016/j.clinph.2015.02.001 · Cited by 2,753
Clinical utility and prospective of TMS–EEG
Tremblay, S., Rogasch, N. C., Premoli, I., Blumberger, D. M., Casarotto, S., Chen, R., Di Lazzaro, V., Farzan, F., Ferrarelli, F., Fitzgerald, P. B., et al. (2019) · Clinical Neurophysiology · doi:10.1016/j.clinph.2019.01.001 · Cited by 472
Self-citationRecovery of cortical effective connectivity and recovery of consciousness in vegetative patients
Rosanova, M., Gosseries, O., Casarotto, S., Boly, M., Casali, A. G., Bruno, M.-A., Mariotti, M., Boveroux, P., Tononi, G., Laureys, S., et al. (2012) · Brain · doi:10.1093/brain/awr340 · Cited by 457
The non-transcranial TMS-evoked potential is an inherent source of ambiguity in TMS-EEG studies
Conde, V., Tomasevic, L., Akopian, I., Stanek, K., Saturnino, G. B., Thielscher, A., Bergmann, T. O., & Siebner, H. R. (2019) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2018.10.052 · Cited by 343
Metadata
- Authors
- Komssi, S., Kähkönen, S., & Ilmoniemi, R. J.
- Venue
- Human Brain Mapping
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2004-01-15
- Volume
- 21
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 154-164
- ISSN
- 1065-9471 (ISSN-L)
- 1097-0193
- OpenAlex
- W2059851007
- Cited by
- 320
- References
- 39
- FWCI
- 4.84
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The effect of stimulus intensity on brain responses evoked by transcranial magnetic stimulation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/hbm.10159
- The paper
- Komssi, S., Kähkönen, S., & Ilmoniemi, R. J. (2004). The effect of stimulus intensity on brain responses evoked by transcranial magnetic stimulation. Human Brain Mapping. https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.10159
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
