ArticleBMJ open2023
Effects of non-invasive brain stimulation for degenerative cerebellar ataxia: a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in BMJ open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effects of Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation for Degenerative Cerebellar Ataxia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Movement disorders clinical practice · 2024Pooled it
- Effects of physiotherapy on degenerative cerebellar ataxia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in neurology · 2024Pooled it
- Public Perceptions of Neurotechnologies Used to Target Mood, Memory, and Motor Symptoms.Device · 2025Article
- The Neurorehabilitation of Neurological Movement Disorders Requires Rigorous and Sustained Research.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionTo date, the medical and rehabilitation needs of people with degenerative cerebellar ataxia (DCA) are not fully met because no curative treatment has yet been established. Movement disorders such as cerebellar ataxia and balance and gait disturbance are common symptoms of DCA. Recently, non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) techniques, including repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation and transcranial electrical stimulation, have been reported as possible intervention methods to improve cerebellar ataxia. However, evidence of the effects of NIBS on cerebellar ataxia, gait ability, and activity of daily living is insufficient. This study will aim to systematically evaluate the clinical effects of NIBS on patients with DCA. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will conduct a preregistered systematic review and meta-analysis based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. We will include randomised controlled trials to assess the effects of NIBS on patients with DCA. The primary clinical outcome will be cerebellar ataxia, as measured by the Scale for Assessment and Rating of Ataxia and the International Cooperative Ataxia Rating Scale. The secondary outcomes will include gait speed, functional ambulatory capacity and functional independence measure, as well as any other reported outcomes that the reviewer considers important. The following databases will be searched: PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CINAHL and PEDro. We will assess the strength of the evidence included in the studies and estimate the effects of NIBS. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Because of the nature of systematic reviews, no ethical issues are anticipated. This systematic review will provide evidence on the effects of NIBS in patients with DCA. The findings of this review are expected to contribute to clinical decision-making towards selecting NIBS techniques for treatment and generating new clinical questions to be addressed. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42023379192.
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.