ReviewFrontiers in human neuroscience2024
The effectiveness of transcranial magnetic stimulation for dysphagia in stroke patients: an umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses.
Review in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 2024. 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.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- A visualization analysis of research on arterial compression hemostatic devices using VOSviewer and CiteSpace.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Pooled it
- Evaluating the impact of transcranial electrical stimulation on post-stroke dysphagia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.The Journal of international medical research · 2024Pooled it
- Efficacy and Neurophysiological Mechanisms of 10 Hz Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation for Post-Stroke Dysphagia: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Revista de neurologia · 2026Trial
- Effects of Interdisciplinary Rehabilitation in a Patient With Lateral Medullary Infarction: A Case Report.Clinical case reports · 2026Article
- Post-stroke dysphagia across the care continuum: a full-cycle framework for rehabilitation, supportive care, and community follow-up.Frontiers in neurology · 2026Review
- Pathophysiology and Etiology of Brainstem-Related Dysphagia.Audiology research · 2025Review
- Neurogenic Dysphagia: Peripheral and Central Neuromodulation.Clinics and practice · 2025Review
- Effects of rTMS on swallowing function and neuroimaging features in post-stroke dysphagia.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2025Article
- Perspective on the clinical management of post-stroke aphasia and dysphagia using repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS).Frontiers in neurology · 2024Article
- Clinical implementation, barriers, and unmet needs of rTMS and neuro-navigation systems in stroke rehabilitation: a nationwide survey in South Korea.Frontiers in neurology · 2024Article
- Clinical outcomes of rTMS-augmented rehabilitation for post-stroke language and swallowing dysfunction: a sham-controlled prospective study with theory-informed interpretation.Frontiers in neurologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Numerous studies have explored the use of repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (rTMS) intervention in post-stroke dysphagia. The primary aim of this umbrella review was to appraise the methodological quality of systematic reviews (SRs), with and without meta-analyses (MAs), that synthesized the findings of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) exploring the effectiveness of rTMS in the management of dysphagia post-stroke. A secondary aim of was to evaluate the consistency and reliability of translational implications of rTMS for swallowing recovery after stroke across these SRs and MAs. We searched several databases from inception to the 14th of May 2023, to identify SRs and MAs that examined the effectiveness of rTMS in the management of dysphagia post-stroke. The methodological quality of the included studies was evaluated utilizing the AMSTAR 2 (A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews) instrument. To investigate the extent of literature overlap among the primary studies included in the SRs, the Graphical Overview of Evidence (GROOVE) was utilized. Of the 19 SRs that were identified, two studies received low quality ratings, while the rest (17) were rated with critically low quality based on the AMSTAR 2 rating. A high literature overlap across the SRs was observed. In all SRs and MAs reviewed, there was a consistent presence of at least some significant evidence supporting the effectiveness of rTMS in enhancing swallowing outcomes for individuals with dysphagia post-stroke, that is, all MAs reported at least a moderate overall effect in favor of rTMS (SMD range = [0.59, 6.23]). While rTMS shows promise for improving dysphagia post-stroke, the current evidence remains limited and inconclusive due to the methodological flaws observed in the published SRs and their respective MAs on the topic so far. Concerning the limitations of our study, language restrictions and methodological shortcomings may affect the generalizability of our findings.
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.