Talk:Deep transcranial magnetic stimulation

Deep TMS

Hi,

I am the one how upload this page Barneayg (talk) 08:50, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

I have noticed that you removed it almost completely and i really don't understand why.

I made this page in comparison to the already exiting transcranial magnetic stimulation page and tried to make it similar.

I think the page, in its former status, was very informative to anyone how is interested in this technology, and particularly to any one how considering treatment using this technology.

In its current status, this page gives almost no information.

I will be happy to fix any problem concerning ref's but i think we should restore the page to its original formation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Barneayg (talk • contribs) 08:50, November 11, 2013‎

Hi, Barneayg and welcome to Wikipedia. You can sign your talk page entries by entering four tildes ( ~~~~ ) after them.

There were numerous problems with the article you created, so I hope the information I will give you will not be too overwhelming, and that you will process through all of it. I will start a discussion at Talk:Deep transcranial magnetic stimulation explaining the issues. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:50, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Copied from User talk:SandyGeorgia. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:52, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Discussion

1. Deep TMS is a version of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), and to that extent, it is not necessary to duplicate information that is already covered at the TMS article, or to include here information that better belongs there. On Wikipedia, that situation is covered by wikilinking to the other article. As examples, it is not necessary to recover the history of TMS in the Deep TMS article, nor the description of coils, etc. All of that would be better covered at the TMS article. So, some of your information was in the wrong article.
2. Wikipedia is not a lot of things, including, it is not a "how-to" manual, so some of your text was inappropriate. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia.
3. Medical content on Wikipedia should be cited to sources that conform to Wikipedia's guidelines for sourcing medical content (referred to as MEDRS). Additional information about how to apply MEDRS is at Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2008-06-30/Dispatches. A good deal of the text you added was sourced to primary medical sources, or non-reliable sources. Bersani et al (2013), PMID 22559998, is a recent secondary review compliant with MEDRS that can be used to source the article when you rewrite it.
4. I understand that you modeled this article after the TMS article (which I have not reviewed); please keep in mind that because anyone can edit Wikipedia, and not every article can be checked, you cannot gauge what one article should look like by looking at another article. On Wikipedia, this is described as other stuff exists. That all manner of content exists that may not be compliant with policy isn't a reason to do more of same. In your case, this article came to my attention because you linked it to other articles that I watch. I don't know if the TMS article needs work as well, and I'm unlikely to find time to get to it if it does.
5. So, in addition to all of that, the version of the article you edited also had large amounts of uncited text. The best thing for you to do is to use the secondary review source that is now cited in the article and is a MEDRS-compliant source to expand the article, making sure that you don't add content here that better belongs in the TMS article.
6. Also, we don't add citations to sub-headings; citations go after the text, not in the headings.
7. The form most often used for citations in medical articles is a cite journal template, generated by putting the PubMed identified (PMID number) into this page. For example, putting 22559998 into that template will return a citation for Bersani, et al.

I hope this gives you enough to go forward with; I have this talk page watchlisted, so that I will see any questions you place here. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:59, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Reply

Hi SandyGeorgia and thank you for your welcome and helpful suggestions. I will address your comments one by one but first i would like to say that after investing time and effort creating this page, comments such as "oh dear" are very discouraging.

1+2. Deep TMS is not just another version of TMS - this is a step foreword beyond TMS. The fact that deep TMS can stimulate 3-time dipper brain areas may offer a non-invasive way of treating a whole new class of disorders (such as OCD) that currently have to undergo invasive implantation of electrode into the brain in order to achieve improvement of the symptoms. In addition, the physics involve is very different from TMS, and the way SHAM tests are conducted is a great improvement as it is double-blind. Those elements are not covered by the TMS page and therefore were inserted here.

3. All the references that were inserted were either from a peer-reviewed journals, or from books in the subject. There were no non-reliable sources. I can understand why you excluded the first (primary sources) but can't understand way you excluded the later.

4. I have modeled the page after existing page as that was a frequent comment when i have initially helped uploading a different page in my language.

5-7. I understand there were some mistakes and i will edit and upload a new version.

Thank you, Barneayg (talk) 06:11, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for signing your entry. You can learn how to thread your responses on talk by reading Wikipedia:Talk page formatting and WP:TALK. I've changed your "Reply" heading from a second-level heading to a third level-heading so the discussion will stay together in archives.

Re 1 and 2, perhaps you can use PMID 22559998 to add content here. Please take care to avoid "How-to instructions" (keep content encyclopedic), and to avoid duplication of content (I see same will be needed at Brainsway).

Re 3, as explained in the links I gave, studies or reports in peer-reviewed journals are often primary sources, not compliant with MEDRS. We can discuss specific examples here on talk, but I suspect you will find most of what you need in the secondary review listed.

Re 4, I understand, and that is sometimes good advice, but there is still WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS (unfortunate that wasn't explained to you, and it is unlikely that other language Wikis have or endorce medical sourcing guidelines as here on en.wiki.

Re 5- 7; discussion on talk is the fastest way forward, particularly regarding how you intend to use sources (primary vs. secondary), and to assure that the article achieves NPOV (that is, the article needs to provide a balanced view of what secondary sources say about Deep TMS).

Best regards SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:24, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi,

I have upload a new version into User:Barneayg/sandbox.

This one include primary sources only as examples. I have tried to avoid repetitions and to insert only relevant data that i think is impotent. I will be happy if you let me know what you think. inaddition, i have tried to link this page to others (mostly to the "see also" section) but was rejected; any suggestion on how to do it? thank you Barneayg (talk) 11:50, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

I will begin looking, but the first noticeable thing is that both Transcranial magnetic stimulation and this article contain discussion of coils, and that article should be written so that information is not duplicated. Then, the H-coil could be a sub-section of that article. Looking at Coil (disambiguation), do you know what that article might be called, or if it has already been written? I will have a look at linking now. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:19, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

From this primary reference, The H-coil, or Hesed coil is just a set of ordinary electromagnetic coils placed in a particular configuration to create deep stimulation without excessive superficial stimulation; however, another primary ref suggests that H-coils are no better than figure-eight coils for deep stimulation. It looks like H-coils are also used in repetitive TMS, so I agree that the coil information should probably go into the main TMS article. --Mark viking (talk) 19:17, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Mark viking why not a separate article specifically about these coils, to eliminate redundancy of content between TMS and Deep TMS? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:21, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

A separate article would be OK, too, if we could find the secondary sources for it. It seems like a new invention and sources I found discussing it are primary and most are not independent of the inventors. --Mark viking (talk) 19:57, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Are you able to access PMID 22559998 ? I do not have journal access. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:28, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Good find. I have access to this article and skimming it shows that it discusses the H-coil in some depth in section 2 of the paper. --Mark viking (talk) 21:01, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

I've suggested several times to User:Barneayg that he could use that secondary review to write these articles correctly, but I do not have access to the full text. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:42, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

The section on "Navigation and Scalp Landmarks" is still "How-to", and uses three primary studies. Please review WP:MSH (don't capitalize all the words in a section unless they are proper nouns). The information on Coils belongs in an article on coils, and you should be able to source everything here from secondary sources. You mention that "The efficacy of Deep TMS utilizing various versions... " was tested, but you don't mention the conclusions of that review for all of those conditions (balance, NPOV). Please note, also, correct us of capitalization on the names of condition. The sandbox still has uncited text. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:39, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi, I have corrected the page User:Barneayg/sandbox according to your suggestions. I hope that it is now ready for upload into Wikipedia. In addition, i have tried to link this page to others (mostly to the "see also" section) but was rejected; any suggestion on how to do it? thank you Barneayg (talk) 11:10, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

SPA, COI, MEAT

Barneayg and Smasafy:

Barneayg added this text to Sandbox on 11:28 December 16 and at 12:57 December 16, Smasafy added the exact text to the article.

Please be sure to review WP:COI, WP:SPA and WP:MEAT.[1] SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:28, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Comment hidden - WP:Forum

Deep TMS Brainwaves ~ Dr. Patel & Dr.Balu My name is Paige and I have had chronic pain, PTSD, Depression and Migraines and I am on my third week of this new machine that takes 20 minutes a day 5 days a week for 5 weeks and I have already stepped back from that ledge that I wanted to jump from everyday. I said I will always try anything once and the first time was a little ruff but after finding my right brain wave spot I guess...not really good on medical terms. I turned on my iPod and listened to music. We are growing together because there are only three machines like this in Delaware and I was lucky enough to be the test patient. I feel like I am getting my life back. I still have pain but the depression is definitely going away. I don't know how they do it but it works! A few more weeks and maybe i can cut more medication and get on with my life..it's been 8 year that black cloud has been following ever since the accident and I finally found a group Comprehensive Spine Center who cares more about me than the bottom dollar. Any question please contact me at paige@pohlcats.com. As I smile and go to enjoy time with my family. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 100.34.12.6 (talk) 21:33, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Advert-Tag

I can't help myself. This article promotes a product of Brainsway. Scientifically the effects are questionable, because no explanations on the physics exist, that show, how a stimulating magnetic field with the correct direction and other relevant parameters is produced without stimulating the typical regions for MDD therapy, which is DLPFC (you might think, oh, thats where the H-Coil is positioned...). There are techniques known to overlap fields short away from the sources, but those only work in vacuum, fluids or with electromagnetic waves. Also I see no comparative studies with Deep brain stimulation to show similar effects or overlapping theoretical explanations. --Amtiss, SNAFU ? 12:39, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

Amtiss, the page is actually better than it was in terms of promotion. I've tried to edit the medical uses to those supported by review articles. While I am not a proponent of Deep TMS in any way, it seems to me that if the uses are discussed in review articles (in the absence of Cochrane reviews) then they can be mentioned here per wp:medrs. For example, see PMID 25709596, a review from Frontiers in Neurology, where the use of Deep TMS is discussed in depression. BakerStMD 17:21, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

It does appear that we have a user from the company editing here Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 09:34, 4 April 2015 (UTC)— Preceding unsigned comment added by Doc James (talk • contribs) 09:34, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

Do you mean yourself? So, then help us: with brain regions are theoretically affected (Bersani review says: up to 6cm into the head;), what is the source of "Deep TMS coils (termed H-coils) can overcome disadvantages of other coils ... over-stimulation of cortical regions and facial nerves". I found some old stuff, but not if the articles describe the newer design of the coil. --Amtiss, SNAFU ? 10:34, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Deep transcranial magnetic stimulation. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131216182732/http://www.globes.co.il/serveen/globes/docview.asp?did=1000813023 to http://www.globes.co.il/serveen/globes/docview.asp?did=1000813023

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:45, 10 December 2016 (UTC)