Development and Validation of the Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Reporting Assessment Tool(TMS-RAT)
Orsolya SzékelyiD, Nicholas P. HolmesiD, Jennifer AshtoniD, Friederike BreueriD, Hsin-Yuan Chen, Nunzia Valentina Di ChiaroiD, Arnaud DuportiD, Polytimi FrangouiD, Louisa GwynneiD, Umair HassaniD, Cassandra J. LoweiD, Brian MathiasiD, Nan PengiD, Jessica L. PepperiD, Phivos PhylactouiD, Malgorzata Anna Szymanska, Luigi TamèiD
Abstract
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.
02 /Specification & Classification
Click any tag to browse matching papers- Citations
- 1
- FWCI
- 2.75
- Field percentile
- top 8%
- Research Focus
- Approach
Reproducibility ledger
Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.
Sign in to file a reproducibility report.
Related papers
- Selecting stimulation intensity in repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation studies: A systematic review between 1991 and 2020
Zsolt Turi, Maximilian Lenz, … Andreas Vlachos·European Journal of NeurosciencePeer-reviewed·Mar 23, 2021
- 'RMT-Finder': an automated procedure to determine the Resting Motor Threshold for Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation
Laurine Boidequin, Marcos Moreno Verdú, … Robert M. Hardwick·Journal of Neuroscience MethodsPeer-reviewed·May 2, 2026
- Comparing electromyography, accelerometry, and visual inspection to assess the resting motor threshold for transcranial magnetic stimulation
Gautier Hamoline, Antoine E Lunardi, … Robert M. Hardwick·Peer Community JournalPeer-reviewed·Jan 5, 2026
- A Comparison of Techniques to Determine Active Motor Threshold for Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Research
Jonathan P. Beausejour, Jay Rusch, … Matt S. Stock·Brain ResearchPeer-reviewed·Jul 3, 2024
- Variants of relative frequency methods for determining transcranial magnetic stimulation motor threshold do not provide accurate estimation of threshold
Boshuo Wang, Stefan M. Goetz, Angel V. Peterchev·bioRxiv·Jul 29, 2026
- Excess significance bias in repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation literature for neuropsychiatric disorders