SynthesisAsian journal of psychiatry2019
Statistical power estimation in non-invasive brain stimulation studies and its clinical implications: An exploratory study of the meta-analyses.
Synthesis in Asian journal of psychiatry, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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.
tDCS Combined With rTMS for the Treatment of Negative Symptoms in Patients With Schizophrenia: a Randomized Controlled Trial
Toward Personalized Treatment of Chronic Pain Using Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Paired With Deep Learning
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Non-invasive brain stimulation for stroke-related motor impairment and disability: an umbrella review of systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2025Pooled it
- Tele-rehabilitation using transcranial direct current stimulation combined with exercise in people with spinal cord injury: a randomized controlled trial.Journal of rehabilitation medicine · 2025Trial
- Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for substance use disorders and chronic pain: A review of the evidence and call for increased mechanistic understanding.Current addiction reports · 2025Article
- Time Dependent Effects of Cerebellar tDCS on Cerebello-cortical Connectivity Networks in Young Adults.Cerebellum (London, England) · 2025Article
- Psilocybin: From Psychiatric Pariah to Perceived Panacea.The American journal of psychiatry · 2025Review
- A causal role of the right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex in random exploration.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Balance of power: The choice between trial and participant numbers to optimise the detection of phase-dependent effects.Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2024Article
- Opportunities and obstacles in non-invasive brain stimulation.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2024Article
- rTMS Reduces Craving and Alcohol Use in Patients with Alcohol Use Disorder: Results of a Randomized, Sham-Controlled Clinical Trial.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for psychiatric symptoms in long-term hospitalized veterans with schizophrenia: A randomized double-blind controlled trial.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundNon-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) techniques have emerged as a promising tool for understanding and treating psychiatric disorders, necessitating a caution in terms of interpreting research results.
objectiveThis study aimed at systematically evaluating a representative sample of research conducted using NIBS interventions in neuro-psychiatric conditions, and assessing the power these studies achieved, given their sample sizes.
methodsA database search was conducted with defined keyword combinations. Using reported summary effects of the meta-analyses as estimate of the true effects, we calculated achieved power of each individual study to detect the effect indicated by the corresponding meta-analysis.
resultsFindings suggest that mean and median powers in the field of NIBS were 0.50, with a mode at 0.83 (range 0.05-1.00). When analysed separately, the median powers were 0.27 for tDCS, 0.70 for TMS and 0.97 for ECT. These studies had a mean total sample size of 22.2 ± 24.9 subjects and the median reported effect size across all studies was 0.61.
conclusionAccording to our findings, studies conducted in NIBS miss around 50% of true positive results. Further, it appears that most of the researchers in this field chase statistical significance with small sample sizes, thus compromising the quality of their conclusions.
Indexed as
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.