Home Journal of Neurorestoratology Article
Article Link
Cite
EndNote(RIS) BibTeX
Collect
Submit Manuscript
Show Outline
Outline
Abstract
Keywords
Electronic Supplementary Material
References
Show full outline
Hide outline
Original Research | Open Access

Research hotspots and global trends in transcranial magnetic stimulation for stroke neurorestoration: A 30-year bibliometric analysis

Haozheng Lia,b,1, Chong Guana,c,1, Dongxiang Fanga,b, Yang Yangd, Mengying Hsiehe, Zhiyuan Xua, Qing Yanga,b, Yi Wua,b,c, Ruiping Hua,b()
Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Huashan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai 200040, China
National Center for Neurological Disorders, Shanghai 200040, China
School of Rehabilitation Science, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai 201203, China
Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Tokyo Sakura Hospital, Tokyo 1130063, Japan
Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Wan Fang Hospital, Taipei Medical University, Taipei 116079, Taiwan, China

1 Equal contribution as first authors.

Show Author Information

Abstract

Background

Stroke patients often experience various functional impairments. Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) has emerged as a novel non-invasive brain stimulation technique, and has gained widespread attention over the past 30 years for its application in stroke. The present study used bibliometric and content analysis methods to explore the research hotspots and future trends of TMS in stroke, with an aim to provide benefits for subsequent research.

Methods

Publications and reviews related to TMS in stroke from 1992 to 2022 were retrieved from the Web of Science Core Collection database. Data visualization and analysis were performed using CiteSpace, VOSviewer, and Scimago Graphica.

Results

We included 1666 papers in the analysis and noted an increasing trend in annual publication volume. Collaboration network analysis revealed close cooperation among scholars from these major countries and institutions. Emerging keywords included TMS, stroke, recovery, rehabilitation, rTMS, plasticity, cortex, excitability, upper limb, and tDCS. Keyword citation bursts appeared to be shifting toward clinical applications, including functional connectivity, systematic reviews, double-blind studies, connectivity, injury, and dysphagia.

Conclusion

Our study indicates substantial growth in TMS publications and citations in stroke rehabilitation since 2006, suggesting a maturing field that is advancing toward more sophisticated treatment protocols. The increasing relevance of TMS in neurological and rehabilitative applications highlights its potential for promoting post-stroke recovery. Emerging keywords such as brain functional connectivity, systematic reviews, and double-blind studies highlight a shift toward clinical applications. The future of TMS in stroke rehabilitation promises continued growth, interdisciplinary approaches, and improved patient outcomes.

Keywords

TMSStrokeNeurorestoratologyNeuromodulationBibliometric

Electronic Supplementary Material

Download File(s)
jnrt-13-1-100148_ESM.docx (34.1 KB)

References

1

GBD 2019 Stroke Collaborators. Global, regional, and national burden of stroke and its risk factors, 1990-2019: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019. Lancet Neurol. 2021;20(10):795–820. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1474-4422(21)00252-0.

Crossref Google Scholar
2

Feigin VL, Brainin M, Norrving B, et al. World stroke organization (WSO): global stroke fact sheet 2022. Int J Stroke. 2022;17(1):18–29. https://doi.org/10.1177/17474930211065917.

Crossref Google Scholar
3

Wang WZ, Jiang B, Sun HX, et al. Prevalence, incidence, and mortality of stroke in China: results from a nationwide population-based survey of 480687 adults. Circulation. 2017;135(8):759–771. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.116.025250.

Crossref Google Scholar
4

Starosta M, Cichon N, Saluk-Bijak J, et al. Benefits from repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in post-stroke rehabilitation. J Clin Med. 2022;11(8):2149. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm11082149.

Crossref Google Scholar
5

Vallejo P, Cueva E, Martinez-Lozada P, et al. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in stroke: a literature review of the current role and controversies of neurorehabilitation through electromagnetic pulses. Cureus. 2023;15(7):e41714. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.41714.

Crossref Google Scholar
6

Bai ZF, Zhang JQ, Fong KNK. Effects of transcranial magnetic stimulation in modulating cortical excitability in patients with stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J NeuroEng Rehabil. 2022;19(1):24. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12984-022-00999-4.

Crossref Google Scholar
7

Leon Ruiz M, Rodriguez Sarasa ML, Sanjuan Rodriguez L, et al. Current evidence on transcranial magnetic stimulation and its potential usefulness in post-stroke neurorehabilitation: opening new doors to the treatment of cerebrovascular disease. Neurologia. 2018;33(7):459–472. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nrl.2016.03.008.

Crossref Google Scholar
8

Ninkov A, Frank JR, Maggio LA. Bibliometrics: methods for studying academic publishing. Perspect Med Educ. 2022;11(3):173–176. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40037-021-00695-4.

Crossref Google Scholar
9

Thompson DF, Walker CK. A descriptive and historical review of bibliometrics with applications to medical sciences. Pharmacotherapy. 2015;35(6):551–559. https://doi.org/10.1002/phar.1586.

Crossref Google Scholar
10

Li C, Tu ST, Xu S, et al. Research hotspots and frontiers of transcranial direct current stimulation in stroke: a bibliometric analysis. Brain Sci. 2022;13(1):15. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci13010015.

Crossref Google Scholar
11

Zhou KB, Zhou Y, Zeng YN, et al. Research hotspots and global trends of transcranial direct current stimulation in stroke: a bibliometric analysis. Neuropsychiatric Dis Treat. 2023;19:601–613. https://doi.org/10.2147/NDT.S400923.

Crossref Google Scholar
12

Taskin Z, Al U. Natural language processing applications in library and information science. Online Inf Rev. 2019;43(4):676–690. https://doi.org/10.1108/oir-07-2018-0217.

Crossref Google Scholar
13

Wang CL, Chen XJ, Yu T, et al. Education reform and change driven by digital technology: a bibliometric study from a global perspective. Humanit Soc Sci Commun. 2024;11(1):256. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-02717-y.

Crossref Google Scholar
14

Jing YH, Wang CL, Chen ZY, et al. A bibliometric analysis of studies on technology-supported learning environments: hot topics and frontier evolution. Computer Assisted Learning. 2024;40(3):1185–1200. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12934.

Crossref Google Scholar
15

van Eck NJ, Waltman L. Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics. 2010;84(2):523–538. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0146-3.

Crossref Google Scholar
16

Pan XL, Yan EJ, Cui M, et al. Examining the usage, citation, and diffusion patterns of bibliometric mapping software: a comparative study of three tools. J Informetr. 2018;12(2):481–493. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2018.03.005.

Crossref Google Scholar
17

McLean AL. Publication trends in transcranial magnetic stimulation: a 30-year panorama. Brain Stimul. 2019;12(3):619–627. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brs.2019.01.002.

Crossref Google Scholar
18

Zhou L, Jin YJ, Wu DL, et al. Current evidence, clinical applications, and future directions of transcranial magnetic stimulation as a treatment for ischemic stroke. Front Neurosci. 2023;17:1177283. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2023.1177283.

Crossref Google Scholar
19

Huang YZ, Edwards MJ, Rounis E, et al. Theta burst stimulation of the human motor cortex. Neuron 2005. 2005;45(2):201–206. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2004.12.033.

Crossref Google Scholar
20

Sakamoto D, Hamaguchi T, Murata K, et al. Study protocol for a multicenter, randomized controlled trial to improve upper extremity hemiparesis in chronic stroke patients by one-to-one training (NEURO®) with repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation. J Clin Med. 2022;11(22):6835. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm11226835.

Crossref Google Scholar
21

Hara T, Abo M. New treatment strategy using repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for post-stroke aphasia. Diagnostics. 2021;11(10):1853. https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics11101853.

Crossref Google Scholar
22

Hara T, Abo M, Kakita K, et al. Does a combined intervention program of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation and intensive occupational therapy affect cognitive function in patients with post-stroke upper limb hemiparesis? Neural Regen Res. 2016;11(12): 1932–1939. https://doi.org/10.4103/1673-5374.197134.

Crossref Google Scholar
23

Momosaki R, Abo M, Watanabe S, et al. Functional magnetic stimulation using a parabolic coil for dysphagia after stroke. Neuromodulation. 2014;17(7):637-641;discussion641. https://doi.org/10.1111/ner.12137.

Crossref Google Scholar
24

Bigoni C, Cadic-Melchior A, Vassiliadis P, et al. An automatized method to determine latencies of motor-evoked potentials under physiological and pathophysiological conditions. J Neural Eng. 2022;19(2). https://doi.org/10.1088/1741-2552/ac636c.

Crossref Google Scholar
25

Wessel MJ, Egger P, Hummel FC. Predictive models for response to non-invasive brain stimulation in stroke: a critical review of opportunities and pitfalls. Brain Stimul. 2021;14(6):1456–1466. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brs.2021.09.006.

Crossref Google Scholar
26

Edwards JD, Ferris JK, Gao FQ, et al. Discriminative utility of transcranial magnetic stimulation-derived markers of cortical excitability for transient ischemic attack. Can J Neurol Sci. 2022;49(2):218–224. https://doi.org/10.1017/cjn.2021.62.

Crossref Google Scholar
27

Miller KJ, Gallina A, Neva JL, et al. Effect of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation combined with robot-assisted training on wrist muscle activation post-stroke. Clin Neurophysiol. 2019;130(8):1271–1279. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinph.2019.04.712.

Crossref Google Scholar
28

Bonin Pinto C, Morales-Quezada L, de Toledo Piza PV, et al. Combining fluoxetine and rTMS in poststroke motor recovery: a placebo-controlled double-blind randomized phase 2 clinical trial. Neurorehabilitation Neural Repair. 2019;33(8):643–655. https://doi.org/10.1177/1545968319860483.

Crossref Google Scholar
29

Mooney RA, Ackerley SJ, Rajeswaran DK, et al. The influence of primary motor cortex inhibition on upper limb impairment and function in chronic stroke: a multimodal study. Neurorehabilitation Neural Repair. 2019;33(2):130–140. https://doi.org/10.1177/1545968319826052.

Crossref Google Scholar
30

Eng D, Zewdie E, Ciechanski P, et al. Interhemispheric motor interactions in hemiparetic children with perinatal stroke: clinical correlates and effects of neuromodulation therapy. Clin Neurophysiol. 2018;129(2):397–405. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinph.2017.11.016.

Crossref Google Scholar
31

Hilderley AJ, Metzler MJ, Kirton A. Noninvasive neuromodulation to promote motor skill gains after perinatal stroke. Stroke. 2019;50(2):233–239. https://doi.org/10.1161/STROKEAHA.118.020477.

Crossref Google Scholar
32

Hurd C, Livingstone D, Brunton K, et al. Early intensive leg training to enhance walking in children with perinatal stroke: protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Phys Ther. 2017;97(8):818–825. https://doi.org/10.1093/ptj/pzx045.

Crossref Google Scholar
33

Kirton A, Metzler MJ, Craig BT, et al. Perinatal stroke: mapping and modulating developmental plasticity. Nat Rev Neurol. 2021;17(7):415–432. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41582-021-00503-x.

Crossref Google Scholar
34

Zhang SY, Jeffers MS, Lagace DC, et al. Developmental and interventional plasticity of motor maps after perinatal stroke. J Neurosci. 2021;41(28):6157–6172. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3185-20.2021.

Crossref Google Scholar
35

Langhorne P, Bernhardt J, Kwakkel G. Stroke rehabilitation. Lancet. 2011;377(9778):1693–1702. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(11)60325-5.

Crossref Google Scholar
36

Lefaucheur JP, Aleman A, Baeken C, et al. Evidence-based guidelines on the therapeutic use of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS): an update (2014-2018). Clin Neurophysiol. 2020;131(2):474–528. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinph.2019.11.002.

Crossref Google Scholar
37

Lefaucheur JP, Andre-Obadia N, Antal A, et al. Evidence-based guidelines on the therapeutic use of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS). Clin Neurophysiol. 2014;125(11):2150–2206. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinph.2014.05.021.

Crossref Google Scholar
38

Groppa S, Oliviero A, Eisen A, et al. A practical guide to diagnostic transcranial magnetic stimulation: report of an IFCN committee. Clin Neurophysiol. 2012;123(5):858–882. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinph.2012.01.010.

Crossref Google Scholar
39

Rossini PM, Barker AT, Berardelli A, et al. Non-invasive electrical and magnetic stimulation of the brain, spinal cord and roots: basic principles and procedures for routine clinical application. Report of an IFCN committee. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1994;91(2):79–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/0013-4694(94)90029-9.

Crossref Google Scholar
40

Rossi S, Hallett M, Rossini PM, et al. Safety, ethical considerations, and application guidelines for the use of transcranial magnetic stimulation in clinical practice and research. Clin Neurophysiol. 2009;120(12):2008–2039. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinph.2009.08.016.

Crossref Google Scholar
41

Murase N, Duque JL, Mazzocchio R, et al. Influence of interhemispheric interactions on motor function in chronic stroke. Ann Neurol. 2004;55(3):400–409. https://doi.org/10.1002/ana.10848.

Crossref Google Scholar
42

Mansur CG, Fregni F, Boggio PS, et al. A sham stimulation-controlled trial of rTMS of the unaffected hemisphere in stroke patients. Neurology. 2005;64(10):1802–1804. https://doi.org/10.1212/01.WNL.0000161839.38079.92.

Crossref Google Scholar
43

Di Pino G, Pellegrino G, Assenza G, et al. Modulation of brain plasticity in stroke: a novel model for neurorehabilitation. Nat Rev Neurol. 2014;10(10):597–608. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrneurol.2014.162.

Crossref Google Scholar
44

Baldassarre A, Ramsey LE, Siegel JS, et al. Brain connectivity and neurological disorders after stroke. Curr Opin Neurol. 2016;29(6):706–713. https://doi.org/10.1097/WCO.0000000000000396.

Crossref Google Scholar
45

Carrera E, Tononi G. Diaschisis: past, present, future. Brain. 2014;137(Pt 9):2408–2422. https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/awu101.

Crossref Google Scholar
46

Carter AR, Astafiev SV, Lang CE, et al. Resting interhemispheric functional magnetic resonance imaging connectivity predicts performance after stroke. Ann Neurol. 2010;67(3):365–375. https://doi.org/10.1002/ana.21905.

Crossref Google Scholar
47

Li HZ, Zhang H, Xu S, et al. Altered spontaneous brain activity in poststroke aphasia: a resting-state fMRI study. Brain Sci. 2023;13(2):300. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci13020300.

Crossref Google Scholar
48

Xu YT, Zhang YH, Zhao D, et al. Growing placebo response in TMS treatment for depression: a meta-analysis of 27-year randomized sham-controlled trials. Nat Ment Health. 2023;1:792–809. https://doi.org/10.1038/s44220-023-00118-9.

Crossref Google Scholar
49

Hamdy S, Aziz Q, Rothwell JC, et al. The cortical topography of human swallowing musculature in health and disease. Nat Med. 1996;2(11):1217–1224. https://doi.org/10.1038/nm1196-1217.

Crossref Google Scholar
Journal of Neurorestoratology
Volume 13 Issue 1,
February 2025
DOI: 10.1016/j.jnrt.2024.100148
Cite this article:
Li H, Guan C, Fang D, et al. Research hotspots and global trends in transcranial magnetic stimulation for stroke neurorestoration: A 30-year bibliometric analysis. Journal of Neurorestoratology, 2025, 13(1). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnrt.2024.100148
Metrics & Citations  
Article History
Copyright
Rights and Permissions
Return