Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34650418›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in human neuroscience2021

Do Brain-Derived Neurotrophic Factor Genetic Polymorphisms Modulate the Efficacy of Motor Cortex Plasticity Induced by Non-invasive Brain Stimulation? A Systematic Review.

Ryoki Sasaki, Sho Kojima, Hideaki Onishi

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06069323 (Therapeutic Use of Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation), which is not on this map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 37% 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.

NCT06069323 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2023, after this paper: background citation

Therapeutic Use of Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (rTMS) in Pediatric Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) and Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Cohorts (ADHD): a Randomized, Sham-controlled Study.

TypeinterventionalSponsorOspedali Riuniti di FoggiaRan2023 to 2026Enrolled80ConditionsAutism Spectrum Disorder, ADHD, Neurodevelopmental DisordersArmsrepetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. 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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Ryoki SasakiInstitute for Human Movement and Medical Sciences, Niigata University of Health and Welfare, Niigata, Japan.
Sho KojimaInstitute for Human Movement and Medical Sciences, Niigata University of Health and Welfare, Niigata, Japan.
Hideaki OnishiInstitute for Human Movement and Medical Sciences, Niigata University of Health and Welfare, Niigata, Japan.
Niigata University of Health and Welfare · JPUniversity of Adelaide · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Techniques of non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) of the human primary motor cortex (M1) are widely used in basic and clinical research to induce neural plasticity. The induction of neural plasticity in the M1 may improve motor performance ability in healthy individuals and patients with motor deficit caused by brain disorders. However, several recent studies revealed that various NIBS techniques yield high interindividual variability in the response, and that the brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) genotype (i.e., Val/Val and Met carrier types) may be a factor contributing to this variability. Here, we conducted a systematic review of all published studies that investigated the effects of the BDNF genotype on various forms of NIBS techniques applied to the human M1. The motor-evoked potential (MEP) amplitudes elicited by single-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), which can evaluate M1 excitability, were investigated as the main outcome. A total of 1,827 articles were identified, of which 17 (facilitatory NIBS protocol, 27 data) and 10 (inhibitory NIBS protocol, 14 data) were included in this review. More than two-thirds of the data (70.4-78.6%) on both NIBS protocols did not show a significant genotype effect of NIBS on MEP changes. Conversely, most of the remaining data revealed that the Val/Val type is likely to yield a greater MEP response after NIBS than the Met carrier type in both NIBS protocols (21.4-25.9%). Finally, to aid future investigation, we discuss the potential effect of the BDNF genotype based on mechanisms and methodological issues.

Indexed as

brain-derived neurotrophic factor genotypemotor-evoked potentialnon-invasive brain stimulationprimary motor cortextranscranial magnetic stimulation

Identifiers

PMID34650418
PMCPMC8505675
OpenAlexW3204048371

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.