Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35456245›Full record

ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2022

Benefits from Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation in Post-Stroke Rehabilitation.

Michał Starosta, Natalia Cichoń, Joanna Saluk-Bijak, Elżbieta Miller

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
5.0field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

34 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 62 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Advanced rehabilitation in ischaemic stroke research.Stroke and vascular neurology · 2024
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.

Michał StarostaDepartment of Neurological Rehabilitation, Medical University of Lodz, Milionowa 14, 93-113 Lodz, Poland.
Natalia CichońBiohazard Prevention Centre, Faculty of Biology and Environmental Protection, University of Lodz, Pomorska 141/143, 90-236 Lodz, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-0139-2451
Joanna Saluk-BijakDepartment of General Biochemistry, Faculty of Biology and Environmental Protection, University of Lodz, Pomorska 141/143, 90-236 Lodz, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-1197-1713
Elżbieta MillerDepartment of Neurological Rehabilitation, Medical University of Lodz, Milionowa 14, 93-113 Lodz, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-7029-1857
Medical University of Lodz · PLUniversity of Łódź · PL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Stroke is an acute neurovascular central nervous system (CNS) injury and one of the main causes of long-term disability and mortality. Post-stroke rehabilitation as part of recovery is focused on relearning lost skills and regaining independence as much as possible. Many novel strategies in neurorehabilitation have been introduced. This review focuses on current evidence of the effectiveness of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), a noninvasive brain stimulation (NIBS), in post-stroke rehabilitation. Moreover, we present the effects of specific interventions, such as low-frequency or high-frequency rTMS therapy, on motor function, cognitive function, depression, and aphasia in post-stroke patients. Collected data suggest that high-frequency stimulation (5 Hz and beyond) produces an increase in cortical excitability, whereas low-frequency stimulation (≤1 Hz) decreases cortical excitability. Accumulated data suggest that rTMS is safe and can be used to modulate cortical excitability, which may improve overall performance. Side effects such as tingling sensation on the skin of the skull or headache are possible. Serious side effects such as epileptic seizures can be avoided by adhering to international safety guidelines. We reviewed clinical studies that present promising results in general recovery and stimulating neuroplasticity. This article is an overview of the current rTMS state of knowledge related to benefits in stroke, as well as its cellular and molecular mechanisms. In the stroke rehabilitation literature, there is a key methodological problem of creating double-blinding studies, which are very often impossible to conduct.

Indexed as

aphasiacognitive functiondepressionmotor functionnoninvasive brain stimulationpost-strokerehabilitationrepetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation

Identifiers

PMID35456245
PMCPMC9030945
OpenAlexW4223605167

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.