Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34777497›Full record

SynthesisNeural plasticity2021

Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Noninvasive Brain Stimulation on Dysphagia after Stroke.

Lingling Li, Hailiang Huang, Yuqi Jia, Ying Yu, Zhiyao Liu, Xin Shi, Fangqi Wang

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic ReviewNetwork Meta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Neural plasticity, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
7.6field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Systematic review and network meta-analysis of robot-assisted gait training on lower limb function in patients with cerebral palsy.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2023
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Intermittent theta burst stimulation vs. high-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for post-stroke dysfunction: a Bayesian model-based network meta-analysis of RCTs.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2025
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. 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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Lingling LiCollege of Rehabilitation Medicine, Shandong University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shandong 250355, China.ORCID 0000-0003-3742-8548
Hailiang HuangCollege of Rehabilitation Medicine, Shandong University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shandong 250355, China.ORCID 0000-0003-1186-4501
Yuqi JiaCollege of Rehabilitation Medicine, Shandong University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shandong 250355, China.ORCID 0000-0003-2869-975X
Ying YuInnovative Institute of Chinese Medicine and Pharmacy, Shandong University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shandong 250355, China.ORCID 0000-0002-3404-0006
Zhiyao LiuCollege of Rehabilitation Medicine, Shandong University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shandong 250355, China.ORCID 0000-0003-1750-5585
Xin ShiCollege of Rehabilitation Medicine, Shandong University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shandong 250355, China.ORCID 0000-0002-1627-3068
Fangqi WangCollege of Rehabilitation Medicine, Shandong University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shandong 250355, China.ORCID 0000-0001-8833-5371
Shandong University of Traditional Chinese Medicine · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Dysphagia is a common sequelae after stroke. Noninvasive brain stimulation (NIBS) is a tool that has been used in the rehabilitation process to modify cortical excitability and improve dysphagia. Objective: To systematically evaluate the effect of NIBS on dysphagia after stroke and compare the effects of two different NIBS. Methods: Randomized controlled trials about the effect of NIBS on dysphagia after stroke were retrieved from databases of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CNKI, Wanfang Data, VIP, and CBM, from inception to June 2021. The quality of the trials was assessed, and the data were extracted according to the Results: Ultimately, 18 studies involving 738 patients were included. Meta-analysis showed that NIBS could improve the dysphagia outcome and severity scale (DOSS) score (standard mean difference (SMD) = 1.44, 95% CI 0.80 to 2.08, Conclusion: Existing evidence showed that NIBS could improve swallowing dysfunction and reduce the occurrence of aspiration after stroke, and that rTMS is better than tDCS. Limited by the number of included studies, more large-sample, multicenter, double-blind, high-quality clinical randomized controlled trials are still needed in the future to further confirm the results of this research.

Indexed as

Deglutition DisordersHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicStrokeTranscranial Direct Current Stimulation

Identifiers

PMID34777497
PMCPMC8580697
OpenAlexW3208165050

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.