SynthesisMedicine2020
Effects of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation with different frequencies on post-stroke aphasia: A PRISMA-compliant meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 7 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy and safety of repetitive transcranial magnetic therapy for post-stroke aphasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Pooled it
- A systematic review of the efficacy of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in treating dysarthria in patients with Parkinson's disease.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2025Pooled it
- Emerging trends and research hotspots of non-invasive brain stimulation for stroke: a bibliometric and visualization study.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Pooled it
- Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for post-stroke non-fluent aphasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Frontiers in neurology · 2024Pooled it
- Global research trends in transcranial magnetic stimulation for stroke (1994-2023): promising, yet requiring further practice.Frontiers in neurology · 2024Pooled it
- The effectiveness of intermittent theta burst stimulation for upper limb motor recovery after stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2023Pooled it
- The Effectiveness of Intermittent Theta Burst Stimulation for Stroke Patients With Upper Limb Impairments: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Frontiers in neurology · 2022Pooled it
- Efficacy of brain stimulation therapies across psychiatric, movement, and cognitive disorders: an umbrella review synthesizing meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials.EClinicalMedicine · 2025Article
- Efficacy of different types of transcranial magnetic stimulation on post-stroke aphasia patients: a network meta-analysis.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Review
- Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation in Post-stroke Aphasia: Comparative Evaluation of Inhibitory and Excitatory Therapeutic Protocols: Narrative Review.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2023Review
- The multidimensional nature of aphasia recovery post-stroke.Brain : a journal of neurology · 2022Article
- Benefits from Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation in Post-Stroke Rehabilitation.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Review
- Functional Remodeling Associated With Language Recovery After Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation in Chronic Aphasic Stroke.Frontiers in neurology · 2022Article
- New Treatment Strategy Using Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation for Post-Stroke Aphasia.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Novel Advances to Post-Stroke Aphasia Pharmacology and Rehabilitation.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Review
- Low-Frequency vs. Theta Burst Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation for the Treatment of Chronic Non-fluent Aphasia in Stroke: A Proof-of-Concept Study.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2021Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundsPrevious studies indicated inconsistent results for the treatment effect of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) on post-stroke aphasics. The study conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate whether the rTMS with different frequencies demonstrated any effect in patients with post-stroke aphasia.
methodsElectronic databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Medline, EMBASE, and Google Scholar) were searched for articles published before July 2019. Statistical analyses were made using STATA 12.0 software. Standard mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for the treatment effect of rTMS on post-stroke aphasia.
resultsMeta-analysis indicated significant treatment effects on naming of rTMS in post-stroke aphasics (SMD 0.76, 95%CI 0.16 to 1.36, I = 76.9%, P < .001). Subgroup analyses showed significant treatment effects on naming of low frequency (LF)-rTMS (SMD 0.40, 95%CI 0.10 to 0.69, I = 0.0%, P = .671). However, the changes in repetition and comprehension following stimulation were not significant.
conclusionsIn conclusion, we provide preliminary evidence that both LF-rTMS and high-frequency-rTMS might be relatively effective and safe treatment for post-stroke aphasics. However, LF-rTMS mainly plays a short-term role in subacute post-stroke aphasics. Longer-term and large-scale studies are essential to explore the effect of rTMS with different frequencies on post-stroke aphasia.
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.