Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38102519›Full record

ReviewNeurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology2024

Clinical application of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in improving functional impairments post-stroke: review of the current evidence and potential challenges.

Ming Cai, Jia-Ling Zhang, Xiao-Jun Wang, Ke-Ren Cai, Shu-Yao Li, Xin-Lin Du, Li-Yan Wang, Ruo-Yu Yang, Jia Han, Jing-Yun Hu and 1 more

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. 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

11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Ming Cai *College of Rehabilitation Sciences, Shanghai University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Shanghai, 201318, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8851-3382
Jia-Ling Zhang *College of Rehabilitation Sciences, Shanghai University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Shanghai, 201318, China.
Xiao-Jun Wang *Medical Research and Education Department, Shanghai Health Rehabilitation Hospital, Shanghai, 201615, China.
Ke-Ren CaiCollege of Rehabilitation Sciences, Shanghai University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Shanghai, 201318, China.
Shu-Yao LiCollege of Rehabilitation Sciences, Shanghai University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Shanghai, 201318, China.
Xin-Lin DuCollege of Rehabilitation Sciences, Shanghai University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Shanghai, 201318, China.
Li-Yan WangCollege of Rehabilitation Sciences, Shanghai University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Shanghai, 201318, China.
Ruo-Yu YangCollege of Rehabilitation Sciences, Shanghai University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Shanghai, 201318, China.
Jia HanCollege of Rehabilitation Sciences, Shanghai University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Shanghai, 201318, China.
Jing-Yun HuCentral Lab, Shanghai Key Laboratory of Pathogenic Fungi Medical Testing, Shanghai Pudong New Area People's Hospital, Shanghai, 201299, China. jingyunhu121@126.com.
Jie LyuCollege of Rehabilitation Sciences, Shanghai University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Shanghai, 201318, China. lvj@sumhs.edu.cn.
Shanghai University of Medicine and Health Sciences · CNPudong New Area People's Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In recent years, the stroke incidence has been increasing year by year, and the related sequelae after stroke, such as cognitive impairment, motor dysfunction, and post-stroke depression, seriously affect the patient's rehabilitation and daily activities. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), as a safe, non-invasive, and effective new rehabilitation method, has been widely recognized in clinical practice. This article reviews the application and research progress of rTMS in treating different functional impairments (cognitive impairment, motor dysfunction, unilateral spatial neglect, depression) after stroke in recent years, and preliminary summarized the possible mechanisms. It has been found that the key parameters that determine the effectiveness of rTMS in improving post-stroke functional impairments include pulse number, stimulated brain areas, stimulation intensity and frequency, as well as duration. Generally, high-frequency stimulation is used to excite the ipsilateral cerebral cortex, while low-frequency stimulation is used to inhibit the contralateral cerebral cortex, thus achieving a balance of excitability between the two hemispheres. However, the specific mechanisms and the optimal stimulation mode for different functional impairments have not yet reached a consistent conclusion, and more research is needed to explore and clarify the best way to use rTMS. Furthermore, we will identify the issues and challenges in the current research, explore possible mechanisms to deepen understanding of rTMS, propose future research directions, and offer insightful insights for better clinical applications.

Indexed as

AgnosiaStrokeStroke RehabilitationBrainCerebral CortexHumansTranscranial Magnetic StimulationMotor dysfunctionPost-stroke cognitive impairmentPost-stroke depressionrTMSStrokeUnilateral spatial neglect

Identifiers

PMID38102519
OpenAlexW4389805259

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.