Fig. 2

Data from a representative healthy participant and from two representative patients with stroke who had distinct, different TEP deflection patterns. (a) Right TEPs of the healthy participant. (B – C) The patients’ contralesional TEPs are shown in the top row and their ipsilesional TEPs are in the bottom row of each panel, for (B) the representative patient with retained quick deflections, and (C) the representative patient with slow and local deflections. The stroke lesions of the two patients are shown in their T1-weighted images. Butterfly plots of TEPs and ERSP of a channel (CP4 or CP3, highlighted in time series, located at the red dots) close to the TMS stimulation are shown in the left. In the ERSP plot, a bootstrap method (alpha threshold: 0.05) was used to identify significantly increased (event-related synchronization, colored in yellow/red) or decreased (event-related desynchronization, colored in blue) ERSP compared with the baseline (− 625 ms to − 100 ms); nonsignificant time-frequency bins are colored in green. On the right side of the figure, the topographies and estimated sources (thresholded at 50%) are shown for five windows corresponding to five well-known peaks of TEPs. The source estimation was carried out by using the minimum norm estimation method using the Brainstorm toolbox