SynthesisFrontiers in psychiatry2022
Effects of non-invasive neurostimulation on autism spectrum disorder: A systematic review.
Synthesis in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Feasibility, safety, and efficacy of high-dose intermittent theta burst stimulation in children with autism spectrum disorder: study protocol for a pilot randomized sham-controlled trial.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2025Article
- Commercial Wearables for the Management of People with Autism Spectrum Disorder: A Review.Biosensors · 2024Review
- Non-invasive brain stimulation for patient with autism: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Non-invasive neurostimulation techniques (NIBS) have shown benefits in psychiatric conditions. While in ASD patients, no guideline has so-far been recommended on these techniques due to a lack of high-quality synthetic evidence. Here, a comprehensive search from database inception onward was conducted in PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane library. Sham-controlled studies assessing the effects of NIBS in ASD patients were identified. After screening, twenty-two studies were included. A total of 552 patients were involved, and the sample size ranged from 5 to 78 patients. Although an iteration from exploratory attempts to more strictly designed trials has been seen to evaluate the efficacy of NIBS on ASD, further trials should also be needed to enable the clinicians and researchers to reach any consensus. Systematic review registration: [https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021292434], identifier [CRD42021292434].
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.