Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27460623›Full record

SynthesisSchizophrenia bulletin2016

Repetitive Noninvasive Brain Stimulation to Modulate Cognitive Functions in Schizophrenia: A Systematic Review of Primary and Secondary Outcomes.

Alkomiet Hasan, Wolfgang Strube, Ulrich Palm, Thomas Wobrock

Open access · bronzeAbstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Schizophrenia bulletin, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
4.9field-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

32 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 59 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. European Psychiatric Association guidance on treatment of cognitive impairment in schizophrenia.European psychiatry : the journal of the Association of European Psychiatrists · 2022
    Review
  19. Review
  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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Alkomiet HasanDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Ludwig-Maximilians-University, Munich, Germany; alkomiet.hasan@med.uni-muenchen.de.
Wolfgang StrubeDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Ludwig-Maximilians-University, Munich, Germany;
Ulrich PalmDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Ludwig-Maximilians-University, Munich, Germany;
Thomas WobrockCounty Hospitals Darmstadt-Dieburg, Groß-Umstadt, Germany; Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Georg-August-University, Göttingen, Germany.
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München · DEUniversity of Göttingen · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite many years of research, there is still an urgent need for new therapeutic options for the treatment of cognitive deficits in schizophrenia. Noninvasive brain stimulation (NIBS) has been proposed to be such a novel add-on treatment option. The main objective of this review was to systematically evaluate the cognitive effects of repetitive NIBS in schizophrenia. As most studies have not been specifically designed to investigate cognition as primary outcome, we have focused on both, primary and secondary outcomes. The PubMed/MEDLINE database (1985-2015) was systematically searched for interventional studies investigating the effects of repetitive NIBS on schizophrenia symptoms. All interventional clinical trials using repetitive transcranial stimulation, transcranial theta burst stimulation, and transcranial direct current stimulation for the treatment of schizophrenia were extracted and analyzed with regard to cognitive measures as primary or secondary outcomes. Seventy-six full-text articles were assessed for eligibility of which 33 studies were included in the qualitative synthesis. Of these 33 studies, only 4 studies included cognition as primary outcome, whereas 29 studies included cognitive measures as secondary outcomes. A beneficial effect of frontal NIBS could not be clearly established. No evidence for a cognitive disruptive effect of NIBS (temporal lobe) in schizophrenia could be detected. Finally, a large heterogeneity between studies in terms of inclusion criteria, stimulation parameters, applied cognitive measures, and follow-up intervals was observed. This review provides the first systematic overview regarding cognitive effects of repetitive NIBS in schizophrenia.

Indexed as

Outcome Assessment, Health CareCognitive DysfunctionHumansSchizophreniaTranscranial Direct Current StimulationTranscranial Magnetic Stimulationcognitionneuroplasticitynoninvasive brain stimulationrTMSschizophreniatDCS

Identifiers

PMID27460623
PMCPMC4960427
OpenAlexW2490229867

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.