SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2014
Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) for panic disorder in adults.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
21 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 44 citations in OpenAlex.
- Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for post-traumatic stress disorder in adults.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- Evidence-based umbrella review of cognitive effects of prefrontal tDCS.Social cognitive and affective neuroscience · 2022Pooled it
- Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation for People With Treatment-Resistant Depression: A Health Technology Assessment.Ontario health technology assessment series · 2021Pooled it
- Noninvasive Brain Stimulations for Unilateral Spatial Neglect after Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized and Nonrandomized Controlled Trials.Neural plasticity · 2018Pooled it
- Psychological therapies for panic disorder with or without agoraphobia in adults: a network meta-analysis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2016Pooled it
- Frontoparietal paired associative stimulation versus single-site stimulation for generalized anxiety disorder: a pilot rTMS study.Journal of psychiatry & neuroscience : JPNTrial
- Precise Magnetic Stimulation of the Paraventricular Nucleus Improves Sociability in a Mouse Model of ASD.Neuroscience bulletin · 2025Article
- Impaired implicit emotion regulation in patients with panic disorder: An event-related potential study on affect labeling.World journal of psychiatry · 2024Article
- Progress in treatment of pathological neuropathic pain after spinal cord injury.Frontiers in neurology · 2024Review
- Disrupted emotion regulation and spontaneous neural activity in panic disorder: a resting-state fMRI study.Therapeutic advances in psychopharmacology · 2024Article
- Pre-clinical indications of brain stimulation treatments for non-affective psychiatric disorders, a status update.Translational psychiatry · 2023Review
- Biological and cognitive theories explaining panic disorder: A narrative review.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2023Review
- Neural basis of implicit cognitive reappraisal in panic disorder: an event-related fMRI study.Journal of translational medicine · 2021Article
- Pharmacological and Neuromodulatory Treatments for Panic Disorder: Clinical Trials from 2010 to 2018.Psychiatry investigation · 2019Article
- Efficacy and safety of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for generalised anxiety disorder: A meta-analysis.General psychiatry · 2019Article
- Treatment of anxiety disorders in clinical practice: a critical overview of recent systematic evidence.Clinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil) · 2019Review
- Insula H-coil deep transcranial magnetic stimulation in severe and enduring anorexia nervosa (SE-AN): a pilot study.Neuropsychiatric disease and treatment · 2019Article
- Updated Review on the Clinical Use of Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation in Psychiatric Disorders.Neuroscience bulletin · 2017Review
- Morbid Anxiety: Identification and Treatment.Focus (American Psychiatric Publishing) · 2017Article
- Neuro-stimulation Techniques for the Management of Anxiety Disorders: An Update.Clinical psychopharmacology and neuroscience : the official scientific journal of the Korean College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPanic disorder (PD) is a common type of anxiety disorder, characterized by unexpected and repeated panic attacks or fear of future panic attacks, or both. Individuals with PD are often resistant to pharmacological or psychological treatments and this can lead to the disorder becoming a chronic and disabling illness. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) can deliver sustained and spatially selective current to suppress or induce cortical excitability, and its therapeutic effect on pathological neuronal activity in people with PD has already been examined in case studies and clinical trials. However, a systematic review is necessary to assess the efficacy and safety of rTMS for PD.
objectivesTo assess the effects of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) for panic disorder (PD) in adults aged 18 to 65 years, either as a monotherapy or as an augmentation strategy. SEARCH
methodsAn electronic search of the Cochrane Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis Review Group Controlled Trials Register (CCDANCTR) was conducted to 19 February 2014. The CCDANCTR includes reports of relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs) from MEDLINE (1950 to date), EMBASE (1974 to date), PsycINFO (1967 to date) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (all years). Additional searches were conducted in Psyndex and the main Chinese medical databases. SELECTION CRITERIA: RCTs or quasi-randomised trials evaluating rTMS for PD in people aged between 18 and 65 years, either as a monotherapy or as an augmentation strategy. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected studies and extracted data and verified the data by cross-checking. Disagreements were resolved by discussion. For binary data, we calculated fixed-effect model risk ratio (RR) and its 95% confidence interval (CI). For continuous data, we calculated fixed-effect model standardized mean difference (SMD) and its 95% CI. MAIN
resultsTwo RCTs (n = 40) were included in this review. The included trials compared rTMS with sham rTMS; no trials comparing rTMS with active treatments (electroconvulsive therapy (ECT), pharmacotherapy, psychotherapy) met our inclusion criteria. Both included studies used 1 Hz rTMS over the right dorso-lateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) for two or four weeks as an augmentation treatment for PD. However, in both studies the data for the primary outcome, panic symptoms as measured by the Panic Disorder Severity Scale (PDSS), were skewed and could not be pooled for a quantitative analysis. For this primary outcome one trial with 25 participants reported a superior effect of rTMS in reducing panic symptoms compared with sham rTMS (t = 3.04, df = 16.57, P = 0.007), but this trial had a 16% dropout rate and so was deemed as having a high risk of attrition bias. The other trial found that all 15 participants exhibited a reduction in panic symptoms but there was no significant difference between rTMS and sham rTMS (Mann Whitney U test, P > 0.05). Regarding the acceptability of rTMS, no significant difference was found between rTMS and sham rTMS in dropout rates or in reports of side effects. The quality of evidence contributing to this review was assessed as very low. Assessments of the risk of bias for the two studies were hampered by the lack of information provided in the reports, especially on methods of sequence generation and whether allocation concealment had been applied. Of the remaining sources of bias, we considered one of the studies to have been at risk of attrition bias. AUTHORS'
conclusionsOnly two RCTs of rTMS were available and their sample sizes were small. The available data were insufficient for us to draw any conclusions about the efficacy of rTMS for PD. Further trials with large sample sizes and adequate methodology are needed to confirm the effectiveness of rTMS for PD.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.