This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Transcranial magnetic stimulation article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find medical sources: Source guidelines · PubMed · Cochrane · DOAJ · Gale · OpenMD · ScienceDirect · Springer · Trip · Wiley · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3Auto-archiving period: 30 days

Individuals with a conflict of interest, particularly those representing the subject of the article, are strongly advised not to directly edit the article. See Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. You may request corrections or suggest content here on the Talk page for independent editors to review, or contact us if the issue is urgent.

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Psychology High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Medicine: Neurology High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Neurology task force (assessed as Mid-importance). Epilepsy Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Epilepsy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of epilepsy and epileptic seizures on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EpilepsyWikipedia:WikiProject EpilepsyTemplate:WikiProject EpilepsyEpilepsy Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Technology This article is within the scope of WikiProject Technology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TechnologyWikipedia:WikiProject TechnologyTemplate:WikiProject TechnologyTechnology Physiology Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physiology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physiology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysiologyWikipedia:WikiProject PhysiologyTemplate:WikiProject PhysiologyPhysiology Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale. This article has been classified as relating to the physiology of the brain, nerves and nervous system.

The following Wikipedia contributors may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view. Protein3EFN (talk · contribs) This user has declared a connection. (COI declared here) AMD1968 (talk · contribs) This user has declared a connection. (COI declared here)

Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about Transcranial magnetic stimulation. PubMed provides review articles from the past five years (limit to free review articles) The TRIP database provides clinical publications about evidence-based medicine. Other potential sources include: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination and CDC

The contents of the Deep transcranial magnetic stimulation page were merged into Transcranial magnetic stimulation. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page.

I think a greater emphasis on the risks with TMS should be mentioned in the article, I already edited the page a bit to add more of the adverse effects (with a source of course) but I think it should definitely be included in the lead, I found myself in a rabbit hole starting with this essay written by a man that was gravely injured by TMS therapy after he was blindly led into its treatments the same way most are, "it's a safe depression cure that couldn't go wrong." He even criticizes the way the therapy is advertised with this essay as well. It seems like TMS manufacturers try their best to bury these negative experiences. There is also a Facebook group full of people with the same experiences. In a morality standpoint, I dont think these people who had experiences like this should go unheard. These side effects do not seem to be as rare as the advocators of TMS want to make it seem Lil Sad Lil Happy (talk) 10:26, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"20241121102600","author":"Lil Sad Lil Happy","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Lil_Sad_Lil_Happy-20241121102600-TMS_can_be_very_harmful_to_you","replies":["c-IntentionallyDense-20241121214100-Lil_Sad_Lil_Happy-20241121102600","c-Ssw86-20241229024000-Lil_Sad_Lil_Happy-20241121102600"]}}-->

Could you find some WP:MEDRS sources to back up your claim? IntentionallyDense ^(Contribs) 21:41, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"20241121214100","author":"IntentionallyDense","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-IntentionallyDense-20241121214100-Lil_Sad_Lil_Happy-20241121102600","replies":[],"displayName":"Intentionally"}}-->

Source no. 17 is linking to an anecdotal testimony. I asked on that blog for more evidence to back the claims up but got tone policed and rudely rejected by people that seem to be generally critical towards science and favour a more spiritual approach.

So right now, the addition of the last sentence „other adverse effects include…“ is misleading and lacking neutrality. Ssw86 (talk) 02:40, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"20241229024000","author":"Ssw86","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-Ssw86-20241229024000-Lil_Sad_Lil_Happy-20241121102600","replies":["c-Lil_Sad_Lil_Happy-20241229050700-Ssw86-20241229024000"]}}-->

I think people who had their life potentially ruined by a procedure that was advertised to them as safe solution do have some credence to maybe be somewhat rude when someone comes out of the woodwork questioning what happened to them really happened or questioning the validity of their story - especially when your comments on there (I just viewed them) came across as sort of supercilious and self-aggrandizing, you even suggested you're smarter than medical professionals by stating the "medical community doesn't know the difference between fatigue in depression but I do", uhh are you even a doctor yourself? If so, then write your thesis that proves what this "difference" is then. Nevertheless, what if someone is certain that a dentist performed a poor or malpracticed operation and they are experiencing further damage since their dental visit, would they not be a little upset if someone said "You should properly research/investigate if what happened to you happened the way you claim it did". I never did TMS, but I could empathize with their position. Also using neutrality as an argument on here is practically pointless. On Wikipedia the aim for "neutrality" is a farce. I have firsthand viewed countless articles that completely dismiss the "neutrality guideline". All you need is merely a source that agrees with whatever sentiment you are trying to make, and non-neutral/obviously biased claims seem to be instantaneously permitted. In this case, the only reason why I added it was because there seems to be thousands of people via the enclosed Facebook group that I've interacted in when doing my research into this. It seems very convincing when so many say the exact same thing when speaking in regard to their firsthand TMS experience. Lil Sad Lil Happy (talk) 05:07, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"20241229050700","author":"Lil Sad Lil Happy","type":"comment","level":3,"id":"c-Lil_Sad_Lil_Happy-20241229050700-Ssw86-20241229024000","replies":["c-IntentionallyDense-20241229190900-Lil_Sad_Lil_Happy-20241229050700"]}}-->

Your facebook groups are not a reliable source. While I sympathize with your struggles as well as the struggles of others on Wikipedia we use reliable sources, not anecdotal testimonies. If you think there is issues with other pages neutrality, please try to fix it but it does not justify a lack of neutrality on this page. IntentionallyDense ^(Contribs) 19:09, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"20241229190900","author":"IntentionallyDense","type":"comment","level":4,"id":"c-IntentionallyDense-20241229190900-Lil_Sad_Lil_Happy-20241229050700","replies":["c-Lil_Sad_Lil_Happy-20241230125200-IntentionallyDense-20241229190900"],"displayName":"Intentionally"}}-->

When did I ever say a Facebook group was a "reliable source"? I said correspondence with these people (through Facebook) is what gave me the incentive to add it to the page. They were all saying the same thing, and it wasn't just a few. The motive to add it to the page and the source argument is 2 different things, I never linked Facebook on this page when adding a source.Lil Sad Lil Happy (talk) 12:52, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"20241230125200","author":"Lil Sad Lil Happy","type":"comment","level":5,"id":"c-Lil_Sad_Lil_Happy-20241230125200-IntentionallyDense-20241229190900","replies":["c-Martinevans123-20241230130300-Lil_Sad_Lil_Happy-20241230125200","c-IntentionallyDense-20241230195700-Lil_Sad_Lil_Happy-20241230125200"]}}-->

The article says: "The greatest immediate risk from TMS is fainting, though this is uncommon. Seizures have been reported, but are rare." This is supported by three academic sources: the journals Clinical Neurophysiology and Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment, and the book Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation for Depressive Disorders. Do you dispute these claims or have WP:RS sources which provide additional information on the risks? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:03, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"20241230130300","author":"Martinevans123","type":"comment","level":6,"id":"c-Martinevans123-20241230130300-Lil_Sad_Lil_Happy-20241230125200","replies":[]}}-->

I'm not saying that you claimed that. I'm saying that your motivations to add to the article are not based in reliable information. IntentionallyDense ^(Contribs) 19:57, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"20241230195700","author":"IntentionallyDense","type":"comment","level":6,"id":"c-IntentionallyDense-20241230195700-Lil_Sad_Lil_Happy-20241230125200","replies":[],"displayName":"Intentionally"}}-->

I am not a Wikipedia editor and therefore don’t know next steps here, but wanted to note for the record that sections of this article appear deceptively sourced. The sentence beginning “other potential issues” cites a medical study that does not pertain to what the editor claims it does, followed by a much lower-quality source that does. The section called “limitations” repeatedly cites sources that do not seem to say what the editor says they do. 174.21.199.101 (talk) 04:47, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"20241210044700","author":"174.21.199.101","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-174.21.199.101-20241210044700-Poor_citation_practices","replies":["c-Ssw86-20241229032700-174.21.199.101-20241210044700"]}}-->

I second this. The sentence beginning with „other adverse effects“ is only pointing to a blog entry and almost the entire section about limitations consisted of claims that were wrongfully attributed to the cited sources. Ssw86 (talk) 03:27, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"20241229032700","author":"Ssw86","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-Ssw86-20241229032700-174.21.199.101-20241210044700","replies":[]}}-->