Holmes, N. P. | Search bioRxiv

bioRxiv2026

Development and Validation of the Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Reporting Assessment Tool(TMS-RAT)

HighlightsO_LIWe introduce the TMS-RAT, a reporting (assessment) tool for TMS studies C_LIO_LIDeveloped within a community-informed, iterative process rating 333 TMS studies C_LIO_LIEmpirically evaluated for usability, inter-rater, and test-retest reliability C_LIO_LIA validated subset enables reliable retrospective assessment of reporting C_LIO_LIThe modular structure enables use across a wide range of TMS study designs C_LI BackgroundA standardised tool for comprehensive reporting can improve transparency, support consistent documentation, and enable comparison across transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) studies. The most used reporting checklist lacks clear definitions of full reporting and was not initially evaluated for usability or inter-rater reliability. A scoping review of studies using this checklist shows that its items are reported only 50% of the time, suggesting that method descriptions are often incomplete. MethodsWe developed the TMS Reporting Assessment Tool (TMS-RAT), a comprehensive reporting framework that provides clear definitions and examples for its items, covering a wide range of TMS protocols. We tested the usability and reliability of the TMS-RAT by rating all studies published between 1991 and 2025 using afferent conditioning (n = 333), a protocol encompassing many reporting categories identified during tool development. Seventeen independent raters contributed across three development phases, a validation phase, and a retest phase, with naive raters introduced in each phase. Iterative refinements of the tool were informed by inter-rater reliability, qualitative rater feedback, and consultation with external TMS experts. ResultsWe present two versions of the tool: the 72-item TMS-RAT v1.0, designed to guide comprehensive reporting, and the TMS-RAT v1.1, a subset of 50 items with the highest inter-rater (overall AC1 = 0.78, range = [0.60-0.99]) and test-retest reliability (overall AC1 = 0.82, range = [0.65-1.0]), intended for retrospective evaluation of reporting in systematic reviews, meta-analyses. ConclusionThe TMS-RAT is a comprehensive, reliable tool that seeks to improve transparency and reproducibility in TMS research.

neuroscience↗

bioRxiv2016

Online control of prehension predicts performance on a standardised motor assessment test in 8-12 year-old children

Goal-directed hand movements are guided by sensory information and may be adjusted online, during the movement. If the target of a movement unexpectedly changes position, trajectory corrections can be initiated in as little as 100ms in adults. This rapid visual online control is impaired in children with developmental coordination disorder (DCD), and potentially in other neurodevelopmental conditions. We investigated the visual control of hand movements in children in a centre-out double-step reaching and grasping task, and examined how parameters of this visuomotor control co-vary with performance on standardised motor tests often used with typically and atypically developing children. Two groups of children aged 8-12 years were asked to reach and grasp an illuminated central ball on a vertically oriented board. On a proportion of trials, and at movement onset, the illumination switched unpredictably to one of four other balls in a centre-out configuration (left, right, up, or down). When the target moved, all but one of the children were able to correct their movements before reaching the initial target, at least on some trials, but the latencies to initiate these corrections were longer than those typically reported in the adult literature, ranging from 211 to 581 ms. These later corrections may be due to less developed motor skills in children, or to the increased cognitive and biomechanical complexity of switching movements in four directions. In the first group (n=187), reaching and grasping parameters significantly predicted standardised movement scores on the MABC-2, most strongly for the aiming and catching component. In the second group (n=85), these same parameters did not significantly predict scores on the DCDQ-07 parent questionnaire. Our reaching and grasping task provides a sensitive and continuous measure of movement skill that predicts scores on standardized movement tasks used to screen for DCD.

neuroscience↗