Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28867993›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in neuroscience2017

Impact of Prefrontal Theta Burst Stimulation on Clinical Neuropsychological Tasks.

Raquel Viejo-Sobera, Diego Redolar-Ripoll, Mercè Boixadós, Marc Palaus, Antoni Valero-Cabré, Elena M Marron

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 45 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Cognitive EnhancementFrontiers in human neuroscience · 2020
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Raquel Viejo-SoberaCognitive NeuroLab, Faculty of Health Sciences, Universitat Oberta de CatalunyaBarcelona, Spain.
Diego Redolar-RipollCognitive NeuroLab, Faculty of Health Sciences, Universitat Oberta de CatalunyaBarcelona, Spain.
Mercè BoixadósCognitive NeuroLab, Faculty of Health Sciences, Universitat Oberta de CatalunyaBarcelona, Spain.
Marc PalausCognitive NeuroLab, Faculty of Health Sciences, Universitat Oberta de CatalunyaBarcelona, Spain.
Antoni Valero-CabréCognitive NeuroLab, Faculty of Health Sciences, Universitat Oberta de CatalunyaBarcelona, Spain.
Elena M MarronCognitive NeuroLab, Faculty of Health Sciences, Universitat Oberta de CatalunyaBarcelona, Spain.
Universitat Oberta de Catalunya · ESHarvard University · USInstitut du Cerveau · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Theta burst stimulation (TBS) protocols hold high promise in neuropsychological rehabilitation. Nevertheless, their ability to either decrease (continuous, cTBS) or increase (intermittent, iTBS) cortical excitability in areas other than the primary motor cortex, and their consistency modulating human behaviors with clinically relevant tasks remain to be fully established. The behavioral effects of TBS over the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (dlPFC) are particularly interesting given its involvement in working memory (WM) and executive functions (EF), often impaired following frontal brain damage. We aimed to explore the ability of cTBS and iTBS to modulate WM and EF in healthy individuals, assessed with clinical neuropsychological tests (Digits Backward, 3-back task, Stroop Test, and Tower of Hanoi). To this end, 36 participants were assessed using the four tests 1 week prior to stimulation and immediately following a single session of either cTBS, iTBS, or sham TBS, delivered to the left dlPFC. No significant differences were found across stimulation conditions in any of the clinical tasks. Nonetheless, in some of them, active stimulation induced significant pre/post performance modulations, which were not found for the sham condition. More specifically, sham stimulation yielded improvements in the 3-back task and the Color, Color-Word, and Interference Score of the Stroop Test, an effect likely caused by task practice. Both, iTBS and cTBS, produced improvements in Digits Backward and impairments in 3-back task accuracy. Moreover, iTBS increased Interference Score in the Stroop Test in spite of the improved word reading and impaired color naming, whereas cTBS decreased the time required to complete the Tower of Hanoi. Differing from TBS outcomes reported for cortico-spinal measures on the primary motor cortex, our analyses did not reveal any of the expected performance differences across stimulation protocols. However, if one considers independently pre/post differences for each individual outcome measure and task, either one or both of the active protocols appeared to modulate WM and EF. We critically discuss the value, potential explanations, and some plausible interpretations for this set of subtle impacts of left dlPFC TBS in humans.

Indexed as

dorsolateral prefrontal cortexexecutive functionsn-backnon-invasive brain stimulationstroop testtower of hanoitranscranial magnetic stimulationworking memory

Identifiers

PMID28867993
PMCPMC5563370
OpenAlexW2747591628

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.