Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24439959›Full record

Trial reportBrain stimulation

Testing a neurobiological model of depersonalization disorder using repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation.

Emma-Louise Jay, Mauricio Sierra, Frederique Van den Eynde, John C Rothwell, Anthony S David

Open access · bronzeAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Brain stimulation. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 43 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Dissociative Symptoms and Interoceptive Integration.Current topics in behavioral neurosciences · 2025
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Using Extended Reality to Study the Experience of Presence.Current topics in behavioral neurosciences · 2023
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Emma-Louise JaySection of Cognitive Neuropsychiatry, Department of Psychosis Studies, Institute of Psychiatry, King's College London, Denmark Hill, London SE5 8AF, UK.
Mauricio SierraSection of Cognitive Neuropsychiatry, Department of Psychosis Studies, Institute of Psychiatry, King's College London, Denmark Hill, London SE5 8AF, UK.
Frederique Van den EyndeMRC Human Movement and Balance Unit, Institute of Cognitive Neuroscience, University College London, UK.
John C RothwellInstitut Universitaire en Santé Mentale, Douglas McGill University, Montreal, Canada.
Anthony S DavidSection of Cognitive Neuropsychiatry, Department of Psychosis Studies, Institute of Psychiatry, King's College London, Denmark Hill, London SE5 8AF, UK. Electronic address: anthony.david@kcl.ac.uk.
King's College London · GBDouglas Mental Health University Institute · CAUniversity College London · GB

Funding

Medical Research Council
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDepersonalization disorder (DPD) includes changes in subjective experiencing of self, encompassing emotional numbing. Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) has pointed to ventrolateral prefrontal cortex (VLPFC) inhibition of insula as a neurocognitive correlate of the disorder.

objectiveWe hypothesized that inhibition to right VLPFC using repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) would lead to increased arousal and reduced symptoms.

methodsPatients with medication-resistant DSM-IV DPD (N = 17) and controls (N = 20) were randomized to receive one session of right-sided rTMS to VLPFC or temporo-parietal junction (TPJ). 1 Hz rTMS was guided using neuronavigation and delivered for 15 min. Co-primary outcomes were: (a) maximum skin conductance capacity, and (b) reduction in depersonalization symptoms (Cambridge Depersonalisation Scale (CDS) [state version]). Secondary outcomes included spontaneous fluctuations (SFs) and event-related skin conductance responses.

resultsIn patients with DPD, rTMS to VLPFC led to increased electrodermal capacity, namely maximum skin conductance deflections. Patients but not controls also showed increased SFs post rTMS. Patients who had either VLPFC or TPJ rTMS showed a similar significant reduction in symptoms. Event-related electrodermal activity did not change.

conclusionsA single session of right-sided rTMS to VLPFC (but not TPJ) significantly increased physiological arousal capacity supporting our model regarding the relevance of increased VLPFC activity to emotional numbing in DPD. rTMS to both sites led to reduced depersonalization scores but since this was independent of physiological arousal, this may be a non-specific effect. TMS is a potential therapeutic option for DPD; modulation of VLPFC, if replicated, is a plausible mechanism.

Indexed as

AdultArousalDepersonalizationEmotionsFemaleGalvanic Skin ResponseHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMiddle AgedNeuronavigationPrefrontal CortexTranscranial Magnetic StimulationTreatment OutcomeYoung AdultDepersonalization disorderNeuronavigation-guided TMSPrefrontal cortexRepetitive transcranial magnetic stimulationSkin conductance responsesTemporal parietal cortex

Identifiers

PMID24439959
PMCPMC3968882
OpenAlexW1968862554

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.