ArticleActa neurochirurgica2020
Patient-reported experience measures in patients undergoing navigated transcranial magnetic stimulation (nTMS): the introduction of nTMS-PREMs.
Article in Acta neurochirurgica, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- Development of patient-reported experience and patient-reported outcome measurement tool for abortion care in Ethiopia: a mixed-method study.Reproductive health · 2026Article
- Brain tumor patient perceptions toward repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for rehabilitation after surgery.Neuro-oncology practice · 2025Article
- nTMS in spinal cord injury: Current evidence, challenges and a future direction.Brain & spine · 2025Review
- Development and validation of a patient reported experience measure for experimental cancer medicines (PREM-ECM) and their carers (PREM-ECM-Carer).BMC cancer · 2024Article
- The assessment of interhemispheric imbalance using functional near-infrared spectroscopic and transcranial magnetic stimulation for predicting motor outcome after stroke.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2023Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatient-reported experience measures (PREMs) are a unique measure of experience of patients which can help address the quality of care of the patients.
objectiveOur aim of the study is to collect quality of care outcomes with our newly navigated transcranial magnetic stimulation patient-reported experience measure (nTMS-PREMs) questionnaire among neurosurgical patients undergoing nTMS.
methodsA single-centre prospective nTMS-PREMs 19-item questionnaire study was performed between February 2018 and December 2018 on patient referred for nTMS at our hospital. The Data was analysed using Likert scale, linear and logistic regression using statistical software (STATA 13.0®).
resultsFifty patient questionnaires were collected (30 males, 20 females, mean age of 47.6 ± 2.1 years) among which 74% of patients underwent both motor and language mapping with a mean duration of 103.3 ± 5.1 min. An overall positive response was noted from the results of the questionnaire, tiredness and anxiety being the common effects noted. Patients with the left-sided disease appreciated more the conditions provided in our laboratory (Q4, p = 0.040) and increasing age was related to less confidence and trust (Q6, p = 0.038) in the staff performing the exam. Younger patients tolerated nTMS better than older patients (> 65 years). PubMed literature search resulted in no relevant articles on the use of PREMs in nTMS patients.
conclusionnTMS is a well-tolerated non-invasive tool and nTMS-PREMS provides a promising role in identifying the unmet needs of the patients and improving the quality of their care.
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.