4.7 Article

Mobile Application for Adaptive Threshold Hunting in Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation

出版社

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/TNSRE.2019.2925904

关键词

Mobile applications; motor threshold (MT); parameter estimation; transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS); motor evoked potential (MEP)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Application of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is expanding with many studies applying adaptive threshold hunting to determine a motor threshold (MT). In addition to being a measure of corticospinal excitability, the MT is used as a baseline stimulation intensity (SI) to which following investigative or modulatory SIs are referenced to. Currently available tools for determining MTs include system-integrated tools and third-party stand-alone software. System-integrated MT-tools are still rarely available and the stand-alone software usually demand a separate computer, and hence possess additional space-requirements. I introduce and validate a free Android-based mobile application (ATH-tool) for adaptive threshold hunting of the MT. The objective is to allow for a simple and validated recording of MTs with sharing capabilities for logs. For comparison, I applied Motor Threshold Assessment Tool 2.0, to compare the MT-values determined with the new application, as it applies closely the same routine. Computational validation with known true threshold values confirmed that the new application captured the true MT at high precision (error <= 0.9%). Previously published data on motor evoked potentials (MEPs) were used to simulate realistic response occurrence by considering experimental data from 15 healthy subjects at different stimulation intensities. The MTs of the different methods agreed well (ICC >= 0.971, p < 0.001). There was no significant difference between the MTs determined with the different methods (p >= 0.151). The novel mobile application should make it easier for researchers and clinicians to determine MTs and log the results.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据