Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37180919›Full record

ReviewHeliyon2023

Effects of repetitive peripheral magnetic stimulation for the upper limb after stroke: Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Ze-Jian Chen, Yang-An Li, Nan Xia, Ming-Hui Gu, Jiang Xu, Xiao-Lin Huang

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Heliyon, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Emerging theory of sensitization in post-stroke muscle spasticity.Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences · 2023
    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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Ze-Jian ChenDepartment of Rehabilitation Medicine, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, 430030, China.
Yang-An LiDepartment of Rehabilitation Medicine, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, 430030, China.
Nan XiaDepartment of Rehabilitation Medicine, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, 430030, China.
Ming-Hui GuDepartment of Rehabilitation Medicine, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, 430030, China.
Jiang XuDepartment of Rehabilitation Medicine, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, 430030, China.
Xiao-Lin HuangDepartment of Rehabilitation Medicine, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, 430030, China.
Center of Hubei Cooperative Innovation for Emissions Trading System · CN

Funding

World Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Repetitive peripheral magnetic stimulation (rPMS) can stimulate profound neuromuscular tissues painlessly to evoke action potentials in motor axons and induce muscle contraction for treating neurological conditions. It has been increasingly used in stroke rehabilitation as an easy-to-administer approach for therapeutic neuromodulation. Objective: We performed this meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to systematically evaluate the effects of rPMS for the upper limb in patients with stroke, including motor impairment, muscle spasticity, muscle strength, and activity limitation outcomes. Methods: The meta-analysis was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guideline. PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) were searched for articles published before June 2022. Forest plots were employed to estimate the pooled results of the included studies, and the I Results: The database searches yielded 1052 potential eligible literature; of them, five randomized controlled trials met the eligible criteria, involving a total of 188 participants. Patients in the rPMS group showed better improvement in motor impairment as measured by the FM-UE (MD: 5.39 [95% CI, 4.26 to 6.52]; Conclusion: This meta-analysis showed that rPMS might improve upper limb motor impairment, proximal muscle strength, and activity limitation outcomes but not muscle spasticity and distal strength in patients after stroke. Due to the limited number of studies, further randomized clinical trials are still warranted for more accurate interpretation and clinical recommendation.

Indexed as

Motor recoveryRepetitive peripheral magnetic stimulationSpasticityStrokeUpper limb

Identifiers

PMID37180919
PMCPMC10172780
OpenAlexW4366749194

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.