ArticleJournal of clinical neurology (Seoul, Korea)2024
Efficacy of Cerebellar Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation in Treating Essential Tremor: A Randomized, Sham-Controlled Trial.
Article in Journal of clinical neurology (Seoul, Korea), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Current and Emerging Therapeutic Targets for Essential Tremor: A Critical Appraisal of Recent Preclinical and Clinical Studies.Movement disorders clinical practice · 2025Review
- Tremor: Clinical Frameworks, Network Dysfunction and Therapeutics.Brain sciences · 2025Review
- Advances in Cerebellar TMS Therapy: An Updated Systematic Review on Multi-Session Interventions.Biomedicines · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background and purposeRepetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) of the cerebellar hemisphere represents a new option in treating essential tremor (ET) patients. We aimed to determine the efficacy of cerebellar rTMS in treating ET using different protocols regarding the number of sessions, exposure duration, and follow-up duration.
methodsA randomized sham-controlled trial was conducted, in which 45 recruit patients were randomly allocated to 2 groups. The first (active group) comprised 23 patients who were exposed to 12 sessions of active rTMS with 900 pulses of 1-Hz rTMS at 90% of the resting motor threshold daily on each side of the cerebellar hemispheres over 4 weeks. The second group (sham group) comprised 22 patients who were exposed to 12 sessions of sham rTMS. Both groups were reassessed at baseline and after 1 day, 1 month, 2 months, and 3 months using the Fahn-Tolosa-Marin tremor-rating scale (FTM).
resultsDemographic characteristics did no differ between the two groups. There were significant reductions both in FTM subscores A and B and in the FTM total score in the active-rTMS group during the period of assessment and after 3 months (
conclusionsLow-frequency rTMS over the cerebellar cortex for 1 month showed relative safety and long-lasting efficacy in patients with ET. Further large-sample clinical trials are needed that include different sites of stimulation and longer follow-ups.
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.