The DOI matches its Crossref record; 134 of the 134 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Use of theta-burst stimulation in changing excitability of motor cortex: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Open accessAbstract
Noninvasive brain stimulation has been demonstrated to modulate cortical activity in humans. In particular, theta burst stimulation (TBS) has gained notable attention due to its ability to induce lasting physiological changes after short stimulation durations. The present study aimed to provide a comprehensive meta-analytic review of the efficacy of two TBS paradigms; intermittent (iTBS) and continuous (cTBS), on corticospinal excitability in healthy individuals. Literature searches yielded a total of 87 studies adhering to the inclusion criteria. iTBS yielded moderately large MEP increases lasting up to 30 min with a pooled SMD of 0.71 (p<0.00001). cTBS produced a reduction in MEP amplitudes lasting up to 60 min, with the largest effect size seen at 5 min post stimulation (SMD=-0.9, P<0.00001). The collected studies were of heterogeneous nature, and a series of tests conducted indicated a degree of publication bias. No significant change in SICI and ICF was observed, with exception to decrease in SICI with cTBS at the early time point (SMD=0.42, P=0.00036). The results also highlight several factors contributing to TBS efficacy, including the number of pulses, frequency of stimulation and BDNF polymorphisms. Further research investigating optimal TBS stimulation parameters, particularly for iTBS, is needed in order for these paradigms to be successfully translated into clinical settings.
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
Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences
Muller, K. (1989) · Technometrics · doi:10.1080/00401706.1989.10488618 · Cited by 99,167
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: the PRISMA statement
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & for the PRISMA Group (2009) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.b2535 · Cited by 83,823
Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences
(1990) · Computers, Environment and Urban Systems · doi:10.1016/0198-9715(90)90050-4 · Cited by 65,269
Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses
Higgins, J. P. T., Thompson, S. G., Deeks, J. J., & Altman, D. G. (2003) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.327.7414.557 · Cited by 63,139
Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test
Egger, M., Smith, G. D., Schneider, M., & Minder, C. (1997) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.315.7109.629 · Cited by 56,722
Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA Statement.
(2009) · PubMed Central · Cited by 44,859
Operating characteristics of a rank correlation test for publication bias
Begg, C. B., & Mazumdar, M. (1994) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2533446 · Cited by 16,955
Duval, S., & Tweedie, R. (2000) · Biometrics · doi:10.1111/j.0006-341x.2000.00455.x · Cited by 14,099
Statistical Methods for Meta-Analysis
Wasserman, S., Hedges, L. V., & Olkin, I. (1988) · Journal of Educational Statistics · doi:10.2307/1164953 · Cited by 10,326
Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P. T., & Rothstein, H. R. (2021) · doi:10.1002/9781119558378 · Cited by 9,799
Cited by
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-citationChung, S. W., Lewis, B. P., Rogasch, N. C., Saeki, T., Thomson, R. H., Hoy, K. E., Bailey, N. W., & Fitzgerald, P. B. (2017) · Clinical Neurophysiology · doi:10.1016/j.clinph.2017.04.005 · Cited by 133
Self-citationLowe, C. J., Manocchio, F., Safati, A. B., & Hall, P. A. (2018) · Neuropsychologia · doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2018.02.004 · Cited by 115
Accelerated theta burst stimulation for the treatment of depression: a randomised controlled trial
Chen, L., Thomas, E. H. X., Kaewpijit, P., Miljevic, A., Hughes, R., Hahn, L., Kato, Y., Gill, S., Clarke, P., Ng, F., et al. (2021) · Brain Stimulation · doi:10.1016/j.brs.2021.07.018 · Cited by 105
Self-citationThe After-Effect of Accelerated Intermittent Theta Burst Stimulation at Different Session Intervals
Yu, F., Tang, X., Hu, R., Liang, S., Wang, W., Tian, S., Wu, Y., Yuan, T.-F., & Zhu, Y. (2020) · Frontiers in Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnins.2020.00576 · Cited by 70
Metadata
- Authors
- Chung, S. W., Hill, A. T., Rogasch, N. C., Hoy, K. E., & Fitzgerald, P. B.
- Venue
- Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2016-04
- Volume
- 63
- Pages
- 43-64
- ISSN
- 0149-7634 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2278690177
- Cited by
- 300
- References
- 134
- FWCI
- 1.82
- 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: Use of theta-burst stimulation in changing excitability of motor cortex: A systematic review and meta-analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2016.01.008
- The paper
- Chung, S. W., Hill, A. T., Rogasch, N. C., Hoy, K. E., & Fitzgerald, P. B. (2016). Use of theta-burst stimulation in changing excitability of motor cortex: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2016.01.008
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.
