Cited by 135Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation StudiesNeurological disorders and treatmentsFunctional Brain Connectivity Studies

Changing Brain Networks Through Non-invasive Neuromodulation

Open access
To, Wing Ting, De Ridder, Dirk, Hart Jr., John, Vanneste, Sven·2018·Frontiers in Human Neuroscience

Abstract

Background/Objective: Non-invasive neuromodulation techniques, such as repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (rTMS) and transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS), have increasingly been investigated for their potential as treatments for neurological and psychiatric disorders. Despite widespread dissemination of these techniques, the underlying therapeutic mechanisms and the ideal stimulation site for a given disorder remain unknown. Increasing evidence support the possibility of non-invasive neuromodulation affecting a brain network rather than just the local stimulation target. In this paper, we present evidence in a clinical setting to support the idea that non-invasive neuromodulation changes brain networks. Method: This paper addresses the idea that non-invasive neuromodulation modulates brain networks, rather than just the local stimulation target, using neuromodulation studies in tinnitus and major depression as examples. We present studies that support this hypothesis from different perspectives. Main Results/Conclusion: Studies stimulating the same brain region, such as the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, have shown to be effective for several disorders and studies using different stimulation sites for the same disorder have shown similar results. These findings, as well as results from studies investigating brain network connectivity on both macro and micro levels, suggest that non-invasive neuromodulation affects a brain network rather than just the local stimulation site targeted. We propose that non-invasive neuromodulation should be approached from a network perspective and emphasize the therapeutic potential of this approach through the modulation of targeted brain networks.

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 · 10.3389/fnhum.2018.00128

Cites

237 of 237 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • rTMS uses focused magnetic field pulses to modify neural activity at the stimulation site and can induce structural and functional connectivity changes in distributed brain networks, including the cognitive control network.

    “rTMS uses focused magnetic field pulses to modify neural activity at the stimulation site and can induce structural and functional connectivity changes in distributed brain networks, 14 including the cognitive control network.”

    From Cognitive Outcomes After Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation for the Treatment of Late-Life Depression: Résultats cognitifs après la stimulation magnétique transcrânienne pour le traitement de la dépression chez les personnes âgées (2026) · cites this paper as [14]

    The Introduction describes rTMS magnetic pulses and their effects on cortical excitability. The MACRO-Level section reports changes in functional connectivity beyond the stimulation site, including after stimulation of cognitive-control regions. The passages support functional network changes, but not the claimed structural connectivity changes; no page numbers are provided in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
To, W. T., De Ridder, D., Hart Jr., J., & Vanneste, S.
Affiliations
The University of Texas at Dallas (US)
Corresponding author
To, Wing Ting
Venue
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
Published
2018-04-13
Volume
12
Pages
128-128
ISSN
1662-5161 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2797266467
Cited by
135
References
237
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 27 · 2024: 27 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 9
FWCI
1.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Frontiers in Human Neuroscience (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Neurology › Neurological disorders and treatments
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Functional Brain Connectivity Studies
Keywords
non-invasive neuromodulation, repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation, transcranial direct current stimulation, brain networks, tinnitus, major depressive disorder, dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, brain network connectivity, stimulation site selection

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