Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25565694›Full record

SynthesisCanadian journal of psychiatry. Revue canadienne de psychiatrie2014

Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation over the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex for treating posttraumatic stress disorder: an exploratory meta-analysis of randomized, double-blind and sham-controlled trials.

Marcelo T Berlim, Frederique Van Den Eynde

Registry-linked trialAbstract readMeta-Analysis
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Canadian journal of psychiatry. Revue canadienne de psychiatrie, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03840369 (Pathophysiological Understanding and Treatment of PTSD), which is not on this map. Cited by 44 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
44citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT03840369 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2020, after this paper: background citation

Pathophysiological Understanding and Treatment of PTSD: an rTMS Approach

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of CalgaryRan2020 to 2022Enrolled25ConditionsStress Disorders, Post-Traumatic, Brain Injuries, Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation, Magnetic Resonance SpectroscopyArmsRepetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation to Right Dorsolateral Prefrontal Cortex, Sham Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation, Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation to Right Dorsomedial Prefrontal Cortex
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

44 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Does non-invasive brain stimulation modulate emotional stress reactivity?Social cognitive and affective neuroscience · 2020
    Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  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

2 authors.

Marcelo T BerlimAssistant Professor, Department of Psychiatry, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec; Director, Neuromodulation Research Clinic, Douglas Mental Health University Institute, Montreal, Quebec.
Frederique Van Den EyndeAssistant Professor, Department of Psychiatry, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec; Co-Director, Neuromodulation Research Clinic, Douglas Mental Health University Institute, Montreal, Quebec.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveRepetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) applied to the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) has yielded promising results as a treatment for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). However, to date, no quantitative review of its clinical utility has been published.

methodWe searched for randomized and sham-controlled trials from 1995 to March 2013 using MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CENTRAL, and SCOPUS. We then performed an exploratory random effects meta-analysis.

resultsStudies on rTMS applied to the right DLPFC included 64 adults with PTSD. The pooled Hedges g effect size for pre and post changes in clinician-rated and self-reported PTSD symptoms were, respectively, 1.65 (P < 0.001) and 1.91 (P < 0.001), indicating significant and large-sized differences in outcome favouring active rTMS. Also, there were significant pre and post decreases with active rTMS in overall anxiety (Hedges g = 1.24; P = 0.02) and depressive (Hedges g = 0.85; P < 0.001) symptoms. Dropout rates at study end did not differ between active and sham rTMS groups. Regarding rTMS applied to the left DLPFC, there is only one study published to date (using a high frequency protocol), and its results showed that active rTMS seems to be superior overall to sham rTMS.

conclusionsOur exploratory meta-analysis shows that active rTMS applied to the DLPFC seems to be effective and acceptable for treating PTSD. However, the small number of subjects included in the analyses limits the generalizability of these findings. Future studies should include larger samples and deliver optimized stimulation parameters.

Indexed as

Stress Disorders, Post-TraumaticAdultFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPatient Acceptance of Health CarePrefrontal CortexPsychiatric Status Rating ScalesRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTranscranial Magnetic StimulationTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID25565694
PMCPMC4168811

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.