ReviewBJPsych open2015
Self-harm and suicidal acts: a suitable case for treatment of impulsivity-driven behaviour with repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS).
Review in BJPsych open, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Efficacy of non-invasive brain stimulation on cognitive functioning in brain disorders: a meta-analysis.Psychological medicine · 2020Pooled it
- A systematic review of the effects of low-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation on cognition.Journal of neural transmission (Vienna, Austria : 1996) · 2016Pooled it
- Adhesive pyramidal thorn patches provide pain relief to athletes.The Kaohsiung journal of medical sciences · 2019Trial
- Multimodal objective assessment of impulsivity in healthy and mood disorder participants.NPP - digital psychiatry and neuroscience · 2025Article
- Changes in microstates of first-episode untreated nonsuicidal self-injury adolescents exposed to negative emotional stimuli and after receiving rTMS intervention.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2023Article
- Article
- Self-harm and suicidal acts: a suitable case for treatment of impulsivity-driven behaviour with repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) - ADDENDUM.BJPsych open · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
summarySuicidal thinking, self-harm and suicidal acts are common, although determining their precise prevalence is complex. Epidemiological work has identified a number of associated demographic and clinical factors, though, with the exception of past acts of self-harm, these are non-specific and weak future predictors. There is a critical need shift focus from managing 'suicidality-by-proxy' through general mental health treatments, to better understand the neuropsychology and neurophysiology of such behaviour to guide targeted interventions. The model of the cognitive control of emotion (MCCE) offers such a paradigm, with an underlying pan-diagnostic pathophysiology of a hypoactive prefrontal cortex failing to suitably inhibit an overactive threat-responding limbic system. The result is a phenotype - from any number of causative gene-environment interactions - primed to impulsively self-harm. We argue that such neural dysconnectivity is open to potential therapeutic modification from repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS). The current evidence base for this is undoubtedly extremely limited, but the societal and clinical burden self-harm and suicide pose warrants such investigation. DECLARATION OF INTEREST: K.B. is the Editor of COPYRIGHT AND USAGE: © The Royal College of Psychiatrists 2015. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Non-Commercial, No Derivatives (CC BY-NC-ND) licence.
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.