ArticleWorld journal of clinical cases2022
Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for post-traumatic stress disorder: Lights and shadows.
Article in World journal of clinical cases, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for post-traumatic stress disorder in adults.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- The Role of Brain Derived Neurotrophic Factor Polymorphism in Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Response for Major Depressive Disorder.The journal of ECT · 2026Article
- Article
- The acute effects of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation on laminar diffusion anisotropy of neocortical gray matter.MedComm · 2023Article
- Challenging the Pleiotropic Effects of Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation in Geriatric Depression: A Multimodal Case Series Study.Biomedicines · 2023Article
- A comprehensive review of transcranial magnetic stimulation in secondary dementia.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We have read with interest the publication that describes the available data related to the use of neuromodulation strategies for the treatment of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Despite treatment advances, however, a substantial proportion of PTSD patients receiving psychological and/or pharmacological treatment do not reach an adequate clinical response. In their paper, the authors draw attention to the current understanding of the use of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) as a potential treatment for PTSD. Most of the previous studies indeed applied both inhibitory (1 Hz) and excitatory (> 1 Hz, up to 20 Hz) rTMS to the right and/or left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. Despite larger therapeutic effects observed when high-frequency stimulation was applied, the question of which side and frequency of stimulation is the most successful is still debated. The authors also reported on the after-effect of rTMS related to neuroplasticity and identified the intermittent theta burst stimulation as a technique of particular interest because of it showed the most effective improvement on PTSD symptoms. However, although numerous studies have highlighted the possible beneficial use of rTMS protocols for PTSD, the exact mechanism of action remains unclear. In their conclusions, the authors stated that rTMS has been demonstrated to be effective for the treatment of PTSD symptoms. Nevertheless, we believe that further research with homogeneous samples, standardized protocols, and objective outcome measures is needed to identify specific therapeutic targets and to better define significant changes when active and sham stimulation procedures are compared.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.