Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 296

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 46 of the 46 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Interference of short-interval intracortical inhibition (SICI) and short-interval intracortical facilitation (SICF)

Peurala, Sinikka H., M. Müller-Dahlhaus, J. Florian, Arai, Noritoshi, Ziemann, Ulf·2008·Clinical Neurophysiology

Abstract

OBJECTIVE Short-interval intracortical inhibition (SICI) is a widely used paired-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) measure to assess inhibition in human motor cortex. However, facilitatory processes may contaminate SICI under certain conditions. Here, we specifically address the contribution of short-interval intracortical facilitation (SICF). METHODS A SICF interstimulus interval (ISI) curve was obtained in nine healthy subjects according to an established paired-pulse TMS protocol [Ziemann U, Tergau F, Wassermann EM, Wischer S, Hildebrandt J, Paulus W. Demonstration of facilitatory I-wave interaction in the human motor cortex by paired transcranial magnetic stimulation. J Physiol (Lond) 1998a;511:181-190]. The individual ISI leading to SICF peak1, trough1, peak2, trough2 and peak3 was selected for the subsequent measurement of SICI intensity curves (SICI(peak1), SICI(trough1), SICI(peak2), SICI(trough2), SICI(peak3)) using intensity variation of the first stimulus (S1) from 50% to 120% of active motor threshold (AMT) in the first dorsal interosseous muscle. RESULTS SICI(peak1) (mean ISI, 1.54ms) and SICI(trough1) (mean ISI, 1.97ms) showed a sigmoid SICI increase with S1 intensity. SICI(trough1) reached the strongest SICI and was therefore chosen for comparison with the other SICI curves. SICI(peak2) (mean ISI, 2.61ms) was U-shaped with a similar increase at low S1 intensities, but a decrease when S1 intensity exceeded 90% AMT. Correlation analyses suggested that this decrease was caused by SICF. SICI(trough2) (mean ISI, 3.50ms) and SICI(peak3) (mean ISI, 4.26ms) showed considerably less inhibition than SICI(trough1) over the whole range of S1 intensities. CONCLUSIONS Findings show that commonly accepted protocols of testing SICI (ISI of 2-3ms, S1 intensity approximately 95% AMT) bear the risk of measuring net inhibition contaminated by SICF. SIGNIFICANCE SICF may contribute to apparently reduced SICI in patients with neurological or psychiatric disorders.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.clinph.2008.05.031

Cites

46 of 46 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 46 references

Cited by

See all 296

Metadata

Authors
Peurala, S. H., M. Müller-Dahlhaus, J. F., Arai, N., & Ziemann, U.
Venue
Clinical Neurophysiology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2008-10
Volume
119
Issue
10
Pages
2291-2297
ISSN
1388-2457 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2042576485
Cited by
296
References
46
FWCI
7.49
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: Interference of short-interval intracortical inhibition (SICI) and short-interval intracortical facilitation (SICF). https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.clinph.2008.05.031
The paper
Peurala, S. H., M. Müller-Dahlhaus, J. F., Arai, N., & Ziemann, U. (2008). Interference of short-interval intracortical inhibition (SICI) and short-interval intracortical facilitation (SICF). Clinical Neurophysiology. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinph.2008.05.031

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.