SynthesisCerebellum (London, England)2024
Effects of Non-invasive Brain Stimulation on Hereditary Ataxia: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Cerebellum (London, England), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- The efficacy of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in patients with spinocerebellar ataxia: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of the Chinese Medical Association : JCMA · 2025Pooled it
- Repeated transcranial magnetic stimulation on the bilateral cerebellum to improve symptoms of ataxia with multiple system atrophy: a prospective, randomized, sham-controlled pilot study.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2025Trial
- Spinocerebellar Ataxia Type 12: Spectrums of Movement Disorders and Clinical Features.Neuro-degenerative diseases · 2026Review
- Progressive Slurred Speech as an Atypical Presentation of GDAP2-Related Spinocerebellar Ataxia: A Case Report.Cureus · 2026Article
- Prevalence and profiles of clinically diagnosed autoimmune cerebellar ataxia in a Japanese nationwide survey.Journal of neurology · 2026Article
- The Status and Future Directions of Treatments for Polyglutamine Spinocerebellar Ataxia: A Bibliometric and Visual Analysis.Current neuropharmacology · 2026Review
- Efficacy of brain stimulation therapies across psychiatric, movement, and cognitive disorders: an umbrella review synthesizing meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials.EClinicalMedicine · 2025Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Numerous studies have demonstrated the potential of non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) techniques as a viable treatment option for cerebellar ataxia. However, there is a notable dearth of research investigating the efficacy of NIBS specifically for hereditary ataxia (HA), a distinct subgroup within the broader category of cerebellar ataxia. This study aims to conduct a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis in order to assess the efficacy of various NIBS methods for the treatment of HA. A thorough review of the literature was conducted, encompassing both English and Chinese articles, across eight electrical databases. The focus was on original articles investigating the therapeutic effectiveness of non-invasive brain stimulation for hereditary ataxia, with a publication date prior to March 2023. Subsequently, a meta-analysis was performed specifically on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that fulfilled the eligibility criteria, taking into account the various modalities of non-invasive brain stimulation. A meta-analysis was conducted, comprising five RCTs, which utilized the Scale for the Assessment and Rating of Ataxia (SARA) as the outcome measure to evaluate the effects of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). The findings revealed a statistically significant mean decrease of 1.77 in the total SARA score following repetitive TMS (rTMS) (p=0.006). Subgroup analysis based on frequency demonstrated a mean decrease of 1.61 in the total SARA score after high-frequency rTMS (p=0.05), while no improvement effects were observed after low-frequency rTMS (p=0.48). Another meta-analysis was performed on three studies, utilizing ICARS scores, to assess the impact of rTMS. The results indicated that there were no statistically significant differences in pooled ICARS scores between the rTMS group and the sham group (MD=0.51, 95%CI: -5.38 to 6.39; p=0.87). These findings align with the pooled results of two studies that evaluated alterations in post-intervention BBS scores (MD=0.74, 95%CI: -5.48 to 6.95; p=0.82). Despite the limited number of studies available, this systematic review and meta-analysis have revealed promising potential benefits of rTMS for hereditary ataxia. However, it is strongly recommended that further high-quality investigations be conducted in this area. Furthermore, the significance of standardized protocols for NIBS in future studies was also emphasized.
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.