Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37006488›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in neurology2023

Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for post-stroke depression: An overview of systematic reviews.

Wanning Gao, Fuyu Xue, Bin Yu, Shuo Yu, Weimin Zhang, Haipeng Huang

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in neurology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. 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

6 authors.

Wanning GaoSchool of Rehabilitation Medicine, School of Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine, Changchun University of Chinese Medicine, Changchun, China.
Fuyu XueAcupuncture and Tuina Department, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Changchun University of Chinese Medicine, Changchun, China.
Bin YuSchool of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Changchun University of Chinese Medicine, Changchun, China.
Shuo YuCollege of Acupuncture and Tuina, Changchun University of Chinese Medicine, Changchun, China.
Weimin ZhangEncephalopathy Department, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Changchun University of Chinese Medicine, Changchun, China.
Haipeng HuangResearch Institute of Acupuncture and Tuina, Changchun University of Chinese Medicine, Changchun, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: There is conflicting published research about the clinical effectiveness of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) for the treatment of post-stroke depression (PSD). In order to provide trustworthy information for upcoming therapeutic treatments, this review attempts to compile and assess the data from pertinent systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Methods: The systematic evaluation of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for post-stroke depression was collected by searching CNKI, VIP, Wanfang Database, CBM, PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library. The retrieval time is from database construction to September 2022. After selection, the included literature was evaluated for methodological quality, reporting quality, and evidence quality using AMSTAR2, PRISMA statements, and the GRADE system. Results: There were a total of 13 studies included, with three having generally comprehensive reporting according to the PRISMA statement, eight having some reporting issues, two having pretty substantial information issues, and 13 having extremely poor methodological quality according to the AMSTAR2. The GRADE was used to grade the quality of the evidence, and the included literature had 0 high-level evidence, eight medium-level evidence, 12 low-level evidence, and 22 very low-level evidence. Limitations: The results of this study are from researchers' subjective evaluation and only qualitative analysis, not quantitative evaluation. Although repeated cross-evaluation of researchers is carried out, the results will be personal. The interventions included in the study were complex, and it was impossible to analyze their effect values quantitatively. Conclusion: Patients with post-stroke depression may benefit from repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation. However, in terms of the quality of the reports, the methodology, and the quality of the evidence, published systematic evaluations/meta-analyses are of low quality. We list the drawbacks of the current clinical trials of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for post-stroke depression as well as potential therapeutic mechanisms. This information may serve as a guide for future clinical trials aiming to establish a solid foundation for the clinical efficacy of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in the treatment of post-stroke depression.

Indexed as

non-invasive brain stimulationoverviewpost-stroke depressionrepetitive transcranial magnetic stimulationstroke

Identifiers

PMID37006488
PMCPMC10061017

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.