Evidence Hub

Depression Improvement Correlates With Lower TMS Intensity in a Randomized Trial With Real-Time E-Field Modeling

Ganesh P, Kim H, Kweon J, Halko MA, Caulfield KA, Brown JC

Human brain mapping, 2026

Abstract

Current transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) practice uses fixed-percentage motor threshold dosing, conventionally 120% rMT, for depression treatment. Individual anatomical variability may result in substantially different cortical electric-Field (E-Field) strengths across patients. We used prospective real-time E-Field modeling to characterize individual TMS intensity requirements and examine associations with clinical outcomes. Twenty-eight subjects with major depressive disorder received single-day accelerated intermittent theta-burst stimulation (10 sessions, 1800 pulses/session) with real-time E-Field-guided dosing targeting M1-equivalent stimulation at left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC). Required %rMT for motor-equivalent DLPFC E-Field ranged from 49.7%-150.4% rMT (mean = 99.7% ± 18.9%), with 53.6% of subjects requiring less than 100% rMT. Real-time E-Field-guided dosing achieved 48.1% better precision than conventional 120% rMT in approximating motor-equivalent E-Field delivery (t(27) = 2.45, p = 0.021). Three dosing frameworks were tested against change in QIDS-SR16 scores: delivered %rMT was not significantly associated with outcomes (ρ = -0.15, p = 0.436), while both the ratio of DLPFC to M1 E-Field strength (ρ = -0.49, p = 0.008) and absolute DLPFC E-Field strength (ρ = -0.49, p = 0.008) were significantly negatively correlated with greater symptom reduction. These findings demonstrate substantial interindividual variability in cortical E-Field…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free