Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31760522›Full record

SynthesisJournal of neurology2020

Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for cognitive impairment in Alzheimer's disease: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Xin Wang, Zhiqi Mao, Zhipei Ling, Xinguang Yu

Abstract readMeta-Analysis
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of neurology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 57 papers, 15 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
57citing papers in PubMed, 15 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

57 citing papers in PubMed, 15 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. High-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (HF-rTMS) on global cognitive function of elderly in mild to moderate Alzheimer's disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2024
    Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Pooled it
  15. Pooled it
  16. Early efficacy of rTMS intervention at week 2 predicts subsequent responses at week 24 in schizophrenia in a randomized controlled trial.Neurotherapeutics : the journal of the American Society for Experimental NeuroTherapeutics · 2024
    Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. 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

4 authors.

Xin WangSchool of Medicine, Nankai University, Tianjin, China.
Zhiqi MaoDepartment of Neurosurgery, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing, China.
Zhipei LingDepartment of Neurosurgery, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing, China.
Xinguang YuSchool of Medicine, Nankai University, Tianjin, China. xinguang_yu301@126.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6585-6529

Funding

National Natural Science Foundation of China 8187052509
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRepetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is a noninvasive brain stimulation technique for Alzheimer's disease (AD). rTMS, with high- or low-frequency, is thought to enhance or inhibit the cortical activities, respectively. This meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was to summarize the efficacy of the rTMS on the cognition of AD patients and to identify its potential influential factors.

methodsLiterature from the Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane Library and Web of Science were searched and screened to identify eligible studies. Standardized mean difference (SMD) and 95% confidence interval were used to evaluate the therapeutic effects of rTMS. Subgroup analyses were performed to investigate the influential factors.

resultsTen studies with 15 trials involving 240 patients were included. Compared with sham stimulation, rTMS could significantly improve cognition in AD (SMD, 0.42; 95% CI 0.18-0.67; P = 0.0006). Subgroup analysis suggested significant cognitive enhancement in participants receiving rTMS on multiple sites rather than on single site, and in patients receiving rTMS of more than 10 sessions, but not ≤ 10 sessions. Compared with rTMS as the single therapeutic method, rTMS with concurrent cognitive training seemed to produce greater improvement. Moreover, 20 Hz rTMS, seemed to be more effective than 10 Hz or 1 Hz rTMS. Furthermore, patients with higher education, or with mild-to-moderate AD were more likely to benefit from rTMS than patients with lower education, or with severe dementia, respectively.

conclusionsBased on the current evidence, rTMS was an effective therapy for cognitive impairment in AD. Large RCTs are warranted to further validate the results of our subgroup analyses.

Indexed as

AgedAged, 80 and overAlzheimer DiseaseCognitive DysfunctionFemaleHumansMaleRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTranscranial Magnetic StimulationAlzheimer's diseaseCognitive impairmentMeta-analysisRandomized controlled trialRepetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation

Identifiers

PMID31760522

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.