ArticleTrials2023
Protocol for a single-blind randomized clinical trial to test the efficacy of bilateral transcranial magnetic stimulation on upper extremity motor function in patients recovering from stroke.
Article in Trials, 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Systematic review of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for post-stroke hemiplegic shoulder pain.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
15 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundNo consensus currently exists regarding the optimal protocol for repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) treatment of upper-extremity motor dysfunction after stroke. Studies have shown that combined low- and high-frequency stimulation (LF-HF-rTMS) of the bilateral cerebral hemispheres is more effective than sham stimulation or stimulation of one cerebral hemisphere alone in treating motor dysfunction in the subacute stage of stroke. The efficacy of this protocol in the convalescence phase of stroke has rarely been reported, and its mechanism of action has not been clarified. In this study, we designed a prospective, single-blind, randomized controlled trial to investigate the efficacy and safety of different stimulation regimens for the treatment of upper extremity motor disorders in patients with convalescent stage stroke and aimed to explore the underlying mechanisms based on biomarkers such as brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF).
methodsSeventy-six subjects will be randomly divided into combined, low-frequency, high-frequency, and control groups based on the proportion of 1:1:1:1, with 19 cases in each group. All groups will have conventional rehabilitation, on top of which the combined group will receive 1 Hz rTMS in the unaffected hemisphere and 10 Hz rTMS in the affected hemisphere. The low-frequency group will be administered 1 Hz rTMS in the unaffected hemisphere and sham stimulation in the contralateral hemisphere. The high-frequency group will be administered 10 Hz rTMS in the affected hemisphere and contralateral sham stimulation. The control group will receive bilateral sham stimulation. Assessments will be performed at baseline, after 2 weeks of treatment, and at post-treatment follow-up at week 6. The primary outcomes are FMA-UE (Fugl-Meyer assessment-upper extremity), latency, and serum BDNF levels. The secondary outcomes are the National Institute of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS), Brunnstrom staging (BS), modified Ashworth scale (MAS), Modified Barthel Index (MBI), central motor conduction time (CMCT), precursor proteins of mature BDNF (proBDNF), and matrix metalloproteinase-9 (MMP-9) levels. Adverse events, such as headaches and seizures, will be recorded throughout the study. DISCUSSION: The findings of this study will help develop optimal stimulation protocols for motor recovery in stroke patients and identify biomarkers that respond to post-stroke motor rehabilitation, for better guidance of clinical treatment.
trial registrationThe study protocol was passed by the Medical Research Ethics Committee of the General Hospital of Ningxia Medical University on January 1, 2022 (no. KYLL-2021-1082). It was registered into the Chinese Clinical Trials Registry on May 22, 2022 (no. ChiCTR2200060201). This study is currently in progress.
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.