Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33219421›Full record

Trial reportJournal of neurology2021

Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for post-stroke depression: a randomised trial with neurophysiological insight.

Brenton Hordacre, Kristina Comacchio, Lindy Williams, Susan Hillier

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of neurology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 8 pooled it
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

27 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 45 citations in OpenAlex.

  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. Trial
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Clinical application of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in improving functional impairments post-stroke: review of the current evidence and potential challenges.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2024
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Brenton HordacreInnovation, IMPlementation and Clinical Translation (IIMPACT) in Health, Allied Health and Human Performance, University of South Australia, City East Campus, GPO Box 2471, Adelaide, South Australia, 5001, Australia. brenton.hordacre@unisa.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7129-6684
Kristina ComacchioInnovation, IMPlementation and Clinical Translation (IIMPACT) in Health, Allied Health and Human Performance, University of South Australia, City East Campus, GPO Box 2471, Adelaide, South Australia, 5001, Australia.
Lindy WilliamsInnovation, IMPlementation and Clinical Translation (IIMPACT) in Health, Allied Health and Human Performance, University of South Australia, City East Campus, GPO Box 2471, Adelaide, South Australia, 5001, Australia.
Susan HillierInnovation, IMPlementation and Clinical Translation (IIMPACT) in Health, Allied Health and Human Performance, University of South Australia, City East Campus, GPO Box 2471, Adelaide, South Australia, 5001, Australia.
University of South Australia · AU

Funding

National Health and Medical Research Council 1125054
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveDespite high incidence of depression after stroke, few trials have investigated the therapeutic efficacy of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS). Here, we aimed to evaluate clinical benefit of delivering a higher dose of rTMS compared to previous stroke trials. Secondary aims were to document adverse effects and investigate the role of functional connectivity as a potential mechanism of clinical response to rTMS treatment.

methodsEleven chronic stroke survivors were recruited to a double-blind, Sham-controlled, randomised trial to investigate 10 sessions of high-frequency rTMS for depression. Clinical assessments were obtained at baseline, after treatment and a 1-month follow-up. Adverse events were documented at completion of the treatment. Resting electroencephalography recordings were performed at baseline and after treatment to estimate functional connectivity.

resultsThere were no differences in baseline characteristics between groups (all p ≥ 0.42). Beck Depression Inventory scores decreased for the Active rTMS group from baseline to 1-month follow-up (p = 0.04), but did not change for the Sham group at post-treatment or follow-up (p ≥ 0.17). Stronger theta frequency functional connectivity between the left frontal cortex and right parietal cortex was associated with lower baseline depression (r = - 0.71, p = 0.05). This network strength increased following Active rTMS, with change in connectivity associated with improvement in BDI scores (r = 0.98, p = 0.001). Adverse events were transient and minor and were not statistically different between groups (p ≥ 0.21).

conclusionsActive rTMS significantly improved depression and was well tolerated. The mechanistic role of theta frequency functional connectivity appears worthy of further investigation. The trial was registered on the Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12619001303134) on September 23, 2019.

Indexed as

StrokeTranscranial Magnetic StimulationAustraliaDepressionHumansNew ZealandTreatment OutcomeConnectivityDepressionElectroencephalographyRepetitive transcranial magnetic stimulationStroke

Identifiers

PMID33219421
OpenAlexW3099054904

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.