Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35781536›Full record

SynthesisJournal of neurology2022

Transcranial magnetic stimulation treatment in Alzheimer's disease: a meta-analysis of its efficacy as a function of protocol characteristics and degree of personalization.

Arianna Menardi, Lisa Dotti, Ettore Ambrosini, Antonino Vallesi

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

Synthesis in Journal of neurology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 31 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. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  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.

Arianna Menardi *Department of Neuroscience, University of Padova, 35121, Padua, Italy. arianna.menardi@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4385-6848
Lisa Dotti *Department of General Psychology, University of Padova, Padua, Italy.
Ettore AmbrosiniDepartment of Neuroscience, University of Padova, 35121, Padua, Italy.
Antonino VallesiDepartment of Neuroscience, University of Padova, 35121, Padua, Italy.
University of Padua · IT

Funding

Young Researchers Grant of the Italian Ministry of Health GR-2018-12367927
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Alzheimer's disease (AD) represents the most common type of neurodegenerative disorder. Although our knowledge on the causes of AD remains limited and no curative treatments are available, several interventions have been proposed in trying to improve patients' symptomatology. Among those, transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) has been shown a promising, safe and noninvasive intervention to improve global cognitive functioning. Nevertheless, we currently lack agreement between research studies on the optimal stimulation protocol yielding the highest efficacy in these patients. To answer this query, we conducted a systematic literature search in PubMed, PsycINFO and Scopus databases and meta-analysis of studies published in the last 10 years (2010-2021) according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Differently from prior published meta-analytic work, we investigated whether protocols that considered participants-specific neuroimaging scans for the selection of individualized stimulation targets held more successful outcomes compared to those relying on a generalized targeting selection criteria. We then compared the effect sizes of subsets of studies based on additional protocol characteristics (frequency, duration of intervention, number of stimulation sites, use of concomitant cognitive training and patients' educational level). Our results confirm TMS efficacy in improving global cognitive functioning in mild-to-moderate AD patients, but also highlight the flaws of current protocols characteristics, including a possible lack of sufficient personalization in stimulation protocols.

Indexed as

Alzheimer DiseaseCognition DisordersClinical ProtocolsCognitionHumansTranscranial Magnetic StimulationAlzheimer’s diseaseIndividualized stimulationIntervention efficacyPersonalized medicineTranscranial magnetic stimulation

Identifiers

PMID35781536
PMCPMC9468063
OpenAlexW4283820767

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.