Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23852313›Full record

Trial reportNeurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology2014

Comparison of two protocols of transcranial magnetic stimulation for treatment of chronic tinnitus: a randomized controlled clinical trial of burst repetitive versus high-frequency repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation.

Bijan Forogh, Seyedeh-Maryam Yazdi-Bahri, Tannaz Ahadi, Seyed-Mohammad Fereshtehnejad, Gholam Reza Raissi

Abstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 40% 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Theta-burst stimulation as a therapeutic tool in neurological pathology: a systematic review.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Repeated sessions of transcranial direct current stimulation for treatment of chronic subjective tinnitus: a pilot randomized controlled trial.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2016
    Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Interindividual variability in response to continuous theta-burst stimulation in healthy adults.Clinical neurophysiology : official journal of the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2017
    Article
  16. Article
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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Bijan ForoghDepartment of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Seyedeh-Maryam Yazdi-Bahri
Tannaz Ahadi
Seyed-Mohammad Fereshtehnejad
Gholam Reza Raissi
Iran University of Medical Sciences · IRTehran University of Medical Sciences · IRKarolinska Institutet · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aim of the study was to compare the effects of two techniques of repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (rTMS) to treat chronic tinnitus; continuous Theta Burst Stimulation (cTBS) and high-frequency rTMS. In a controlled randomized clinical trial, 55 patients with chronic tinnitus were randomly divided in two groups. They received four sessions of treatment. cTBS was tested on one group and high-frequency rTMS (10 Hz) was tested on the other. Severity of the tinnitus was assessed before treatment, after the last treatment session and then 1-month later. Both the treatments of high-frequency and cTBS had a suppressive effect on tinnitus. However, cTBS was more effective than high-frequency rTMS (P = 0.001). This study suggests that rTMS even in four sessions is effective in reducing tinnitus severity; moreover, compared to high-frequency TMS better results can be achieved with cTBS.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedAge FactorsAuditory CortexChronic DiseaseFemaleFollow-Up StudiesFunctional LateralityHumansMaleMiddle AgedMultivariate AnalysisSeverity of Illness IndexSex FactorsTime Factors

Identifiers

PMID23852313
OpenAlexW2053524091

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.