Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35365806›Full record

SynthesisMolecular psychiatry2022

Efficacy of neurostimulation across mental disorders: systematic review and meta-analysis of 208 randomized controlled trials.

Joshua Hyde, Hannah Carr, Nicholas Kelley, Rose Seneviratne, Claire Reed, Valeria Parlatini, Matthew Garner, Marco Solmi, Stella Rosson, Samuele Cortese and 1 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Molecular psychiatry, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 123 papers, 27 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
123citing papers in PubMed, 27 pooled it
18.3field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

123 citing papers in PubMed, 27 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 234 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. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Pooled it
  15. Pooled it
  16. Pooled it
  17. Pooled it
  18. Pooled it
  19. Pooled it
  20. Pooled it

63 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

11 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.

Joshua HydeCentre for Innovation in Mental Health, School of Psychology, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK. jjh2g17@soton.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6987-023X
Hannah CarrCentre for Innovation in Mental Health, School of Psychology, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Nicholas KelleyCentre for Research on Self and Identity, School of Psychology, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Rose SeneviratneCentre for Innovation in Mental Health, School of Psychology, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Claire ReedCentre for Innovation in Mental Health, School of Psychology, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1385-4729
Valeria ParlatiniDepartment of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.
Matthew GarnerCentre for Innovation in Mental Health, School of Psychology, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Marco SolmiDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4877-7233
Stella RossonDepartment of Mental Health, Azienda AULSS 3 Serenissima, Venice, Italy.
Samuele Cortese *Centre for Innovation in Mental Health, School of Psychology, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Valerie Brandt *Centre for Innovation in Mental Health, School of Psychology, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
University of Southampton · GBAzienda Sanitaria Locale Roma 3 · ITKing's College London · GBUniversity of Nottingham · GBUniversity of Ottawa · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS), including transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), is a potentially effective treatment strategy for a number of mental conditions. However, no quantitative evidence synthesis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of TMS or tDCS using the same criteria including several mental conditions is available. Based on 208 RCTs identified in a systematic review, we conducted a series of random effects meta-analyses to assess the efficacy of NIBS, compared to sham, for core symptoms and cognitive functioning within a broad range of mental conditions. Outcomes included changes in core symptom severity and cognitive functioning from pre- to post-treatment. We found significant positive effects for several outcomes without significant heterogeneity including TMS for symptoms of generalized anxiety disorder (SMD = -1.8 (95% CI: -2.6 to -1), and tDCS for symptoms of substance use disorder (-0.73, -1.00 to -0.46). There was also significant effects for TMS in obsessive-compulsive disorder (-0.66, -0.91 to -0.41) and unipolar depression symptoms (-0.60, -0.78 to -0.42) but with significant heterogeneity. However, subgroup analyses based on stimulation site and number of treatment sessions revealed evidence of positive effects, without significant heterogeneity, for specific TMS stimulation protocols. For neurocognitive outcomes, there was only significant evidence, without significant heterogeneity, for tDCS for improving attention (-0.3, -0.55 to -0.05) and working memory (-0.38, -0.74 to -0.03) in individuals with schizophrenia. We concluded that TMS and tDCS can benefit individuals with a variety of mental conditions, significantly improving clinical dimensions, including cognitive deficits in schizophrenia which are poorly responsive to pharmacotherapy.

Indexed as

SchizophreniaTranscranial Direct Current StimulationCognitionHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation

Identifiers

PMID35365806
PMCPMC8973679
OpenAlexW4220884311

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.