Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20559144›Full record

Trial reportThe journal of ECT2011

Fractional anisotropy changes after several weeks of daily left high-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation of the prefrontal cortex to treat major depression.

F Andrew Kozel, Kevin A Johnson, Ziad Nahas, Paul A Nakonezny, Paul S Morgan, Berry S Anderson, Samet Kose, Xingbao Li, Kelvin O Lim, Madhukar H Trivedi and 1 more

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in The journal of ECT, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 50 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Neuroimaging Mechanisms of Therapeutic Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation for Major Depressive Disorder.Biological psychiatry. Cognitive neuroscience and neuroimaging · 2018
    Review
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.

F Andrew KozelDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA. Andrew.Kozel@utsouthwestern.edu
Kevin A Johnson
Ziad Nahas
Paul A Nakonezny
Paul S Morgan
Berry S Anderson
Samet Kose
Xingbao Li
Kelvin O Lim
Madhukar H Trivedi
Mark S George
Medical University of South Carolina · USAdvanced Imaging Research (United States) · USThe University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center · USClinical Research Management · USUniversity of Minnesota · USUniversity of South Carolina · US

Funding

Investigating Neurocircuitry of Geriatric DepressionK23MH070897 · NIMH · UT SOUTHWESTERN MEDICAL CENTER · PI KOZEL, FRANK ANDREW · 2005 to 2008
$675k
NIMH NIH HHS 5K23MH070897-01NIMH NIH HHS K23 MH070897
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesAs part of a sham controlled treatment trial using daily left repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), brain changes associated with 4 to 6 weeks of treatment were examined using diffusion tensor imaging to noninvasively evaluate prefrontal white matter (WM) microstructure. A decrease in fractional anisotropy values of the left prefrontal WM could indicate damage to the region.

methodsDiffusion tensor imaging was performed before and after 4 to 6 weeks of daily rTMS treatments. Mean fractional anisotropy levels associated with active rTMS and sham rTMS for the right and left prefrontal WM were assessed.

resultsAdequate images were acquired for 8 participants (active n = 4, sham n = 4) before and after rTMS. A mean increase was found for the left prefrontal WM. The mixed model revealed a trend toward a significant treatment group × region interaction effect (P = 0.11). Furthermore, simple region effects (left prefrontal WM vs right prefrontal WM) were at a trend toward significance for difference after treatment within the active rTMS group (P = 0.07), but not within the sham rTMS group (P = 0.88).

conclusionsRepetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation resulted in no evidence of damage to WM on the side of stimulation. Diffusion tensor imaging may offer a unique modality to increase our understanding of mechanisms of action for rTMS.

Indexed as

Prefrontal CortexTranscranial Magnetic StimulationAdolescentAdultAgedAnisotropyFemaleHumansMajor Depressive DisorderMaleMiddle Aged

Identifiers

PMID20559144
PMCPMC2975808
OpenAlexW2019114666

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.