Back

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

Szekely, O.; Holmes, N. P.; Ashton, J.; Breuer, F.; Chen, H.-Y.; Di Chiaro, N. V.; Duport, A.; Frangou, P.; Gwynne, L.; Hassan, U.; Lowe, C. J.; Mathias, B.; Peng, N.; Pepper, J. L.; Phylactou, P.; Szymanska, M. A.; Tame, L.

2026-02-19 neuroscience
10.64898/2026.02.18.706460 bioRxiv
Show 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.

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS Biology
408 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
14.6%
2
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 15%
12.5%
3
Research Synthesis Methods
20 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
7.3%
4
Brain Stimulation
112 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
6.4%
5
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 32%
4.9%
6
Scientific Data
174 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
4.9%
50% of probability mass above
7
eneuro
389 papers in training set
Top 2%
4.4%
8
Nature Human Behaviour
85 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
3.6%
9
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
28 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.6%
10
Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews
43 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.6%
11
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 55%
1.8%
12
NeuroImage
813 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.8%
13
Journal of Translational Medicine
46 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.7%
14
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
61 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.5%
15
Trials
25 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.3%
16
European Journal of Neuroscience
168 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.3%
17
Wellcome Open Research
57 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.1%
18
Journal of Neural Engineering
197 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.1%
19
BMC Medicine
163 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.0%
20
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 57%
0.8%
21
F1000Research
79 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.7%
22
Frontiers in Neurology
91 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.7%
23
Pain
70 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.7%
24
Progress in Neuro-Psychopharmacology and Biological Psychiatry
36 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
25
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 13%
0.7%
26
Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences
12 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.5%
27
Nature Neuroscience
216 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.5%
28
BMJ Mental Health
15 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.5%
29
Aperture Neuro
18 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.5%
30
FACETS
11 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.5%