ArticleHeliyon2023
Determination of the effect of repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (rTMS) on the primary visual cortex on improving the visual status of patients with subcortical stroke in the area of the posterior cerebral artery.
Article in Heliyon, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Non-invasive brain stimulation for treating visual defects: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2025Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and objective: Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (rTMS)-induced neuroplasticity to induce Methods: After obtaining written consent, this non-randomized clinical trial study was performed on ten eligible patients. The National Eye Institute 25-items Visual Function Questionnaire (NEI-VFQ) and 30-degree automated Perimetry (visual field test) were used to assess patients' vision status before and after ten rTMS sessions. Paired T-test and Student T-test were used to analyze the data using SPSS software. Findings: A comparison of the mean and standard deviation of the total score of the VFQ-25 for each question did not show a significant difference between pre-test and post-test. In perimetry values based on the Visual Field Index (VFI), the correlation of mean deviation (MD) and the pattern standard deviation (PSD) did not differ significantly before and after the intervention. Conclusion: According to the results of this study, the rTMS method cannot be reliable as an effective method in the treatment of visual impairment caused by stroke. Therefore, our study does not definitively support rTMS as the first-choice method by physicians for stroke rehabilitation with visual impairment.
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.