Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26433217›Full record

Trial reportSchizophrenia bulletin2016

Cognitive Effects of High-Frequency rTMS in Schizophrenia Patients With Predominant Negative Symptoms: Results From a Multicenter Randomized Sham-Controlled Trial.

Alkomiet Hasan, Birgit Guse, Joachim Cordes, Wolfgang Wölwer, Georg Winterer, Wolfgang Gaebel, Berthold Langguth, Michael Landgrebe, Peter Eichhammer, Elmar Frank and 11 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Schizophrenia bulletin, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 44 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
44citing papers in PubMed, 8 pooled it
4.6field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

44 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 96 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Review
  18. Article
  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

21 authors at 9 institutions in 2 countries.

Alkomiet HasanDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Ludwig-Maximilians-University, Munich, Germany; These authors contributed equally to the article. alkomiet.hasan@med.uni-muenchen.de.
Birgit GuseDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Georg-August-University Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany; These authors contributed equally to the article.
Joachim CordesDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Heinrich-Heine University, Düsseldorf, Germany;
Wolfgang WölwerDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Heinrich-Heine University, Düsseldorf, Germany;
Georg WintererThe Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany;
Wolfgang GaebelDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Heinrich-Heine University, Düsseldorf, Germany;
Berthold LangguthDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University of Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany;
Michael LandgrebeDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University of Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany; Department of Psychiatry, Psychosomatics and Psychotherapy, kbo-Lech-Mangfall-Klinik, Agatharied, Germany;
Peter EichhammerDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University of Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany;
Elmar FrankDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University of Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany;
Göran HajakDepartment of Psychiatry, Psychosomatics and Psychotherapy, Sozialstiftung Bamberg, Bamberg, Germany;
Christian OhmannCoordination Centre for Clinical Trials, Heinrich-Heine University, Düsseldorf, Germany;
Pablo E VerdeCoordination Centre for Clinical Trials, Heinrich-Heine University, Düsseldorf, Germany;
Marcella RietschelDepartment of Genetic Epidemiology in Psychiatry, Institute of Central Mental Health, Medical Faculty Mannheim, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany;
Raees AhmedInstitut für anwendungsorientierte Forschung und klinische Studien GmbH, Göttingen, Germany;
William G HonerInstitute of Mental Health, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada;
Berend MalchowDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Ludwig-Maximilians-University, Munich, Germany;
Susanne KarchDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Ludwig-Maximilians-University, Munich, Germany;
Thomas Schneider-AxmannDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Ludwig-Maximilians-University, Munich, Germany;
Peter FalkaiDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Ludwig-Maximilians-University, Munich, Germany;
Thomas WobrockDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Georg-August-University Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany; County Hospitals Darmstadt-Dieburg, Groß-Umstadt, Germany.
Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf · DELudwig-Maximilians-Universität München · DEUniversity of Regensburg · DEUniversity of Göttingen · DEBC Mental Health & Substance Use Services · CACharité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin · DEForschungsinstitut für Anwendungsorientierte Wissensverarbeitung · DEHeidelberg University · DESozialstiftung Bamberg · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cognitive impairments are one of the main contributors to disability and poor long-term outcome in schizophrenia. Proof-of-concept trials indicate that repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) applied to the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) has the potential to improve cognitive functioning. We analyzed the effects of 10-Hz rTMS to the left DLPFC on cognitive deficits in schizophrenia in a large-scale and multicenter, sham-controlled study. A total of 156 schizophrenia patients with predominant negative symptoms were randomly assigned to a 3-week intervention (10-Hz rTMS, 15 sessions, 1000 stimuli per session) with either active or sham rTMS. The Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test, Trail Making Test A and B, Wisconsin Card Sorting Test, Digit Span Test, and the Regensburg Word Fluency Test were administered before intervention and at day 21, 45, and 105 follow-up. From the test results, a neuropsychological composite score was computed. Both groups showed no differences in any of the outcome variables before and after intervention. Both groups improved markedly over time, but effect sizes indicate a numeric, but nonsignificant superiority of active rTMS in certain cognitive tests. Active 10-Hz rTMS applied to the left DLPFC for 3 weeks was not superior to sham rTMS in the improvement of various cognitive domains in schizophrenia patients with predominant negative symptoms. This is in contrast to previous preliminary proof-of-concept trials, but highlights the need for more multicenter randomized controlled trials in the field of noninvasive brain stimulation.

Indexed as

Outcome Assessment, Health CareAdultCognitive DysfunctionFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPlacebosSchizophreniaTranscranial Magnetic StimulationTreatment OutcomePlacebosbrain plasticitycognitionnegative symptomsrepetitive magnetic stimulationschizophrenia

Identifiers

PMID26433217
PMCPMC4838079
OpenAlexW2293755694

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.