ArticleCerebellum (London, England)2024
Cerebellar Theta Burst Stimulation Impairs Working Memory.
Article 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 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Multifocal Noninvasive Deep Brain Stimulation to Enhance Cognition in Mild Cognitive Impairment: A Crossover Trial.JAMA network open · 2026Trial
- Bilateral cerebellar intermittent theta-burst stimulation combined with laryngeal elevation training promotes neurorestoration in post-stroke dysphagia.Scientific reports · 2026Trial
- An update on the effects of cerebellar transcranial magnetic stimulation on cognitive function.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2026Review
- Effects of Cerebellar Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation at Different Frequencies on Working Memory: An EEG Study.CNS neuroscience & therapeutics · 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Working memory refers to the process of temporarily storing and manipulating information. The role of the cerebellum in working memory is thought to be achieved through its connections with the prefrontal cortex. Previous studies showed that theta burst stimulation (TBS), a form of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation, of the cerebellum changes its functional connectivity with the prefrontal cortex. Specifically, excitatory intermittent TBS (iTBS) increases, whereas inhibitory continuous TBS (cTBS) decreases this functional connectivity. We hypothesized that iTBS on the cerebellum will improve working memory, whereas cTBS will disrupt it. Sixteen healthy participants (10 women) participated in this study. Bilateral cerebellar stimulation was applied with a figure-of-eight coil at 3 cm lateral and 1 cm below the inion. The participants received iTBS, cTBS, and sham iTBS in three separate sessions in random order. Within 30 min after TBS, the participants performed four working memory tasks: letter 1-Back and 2-Back, digit span forward, and digit span backward. Repeated measures analysis of variance revealed a significant effect of the type of stimulation (iTBS/cTBS/Sham) on performance in the digit span backward task (p = 0.02). The planned comparison showed that the cTBS condition had significantly lower scores than the sham condition (p = 0.01). iTBS and cTBS did not affect performance in the 1- and 2-Back and the digit span forward tasks compared to sham stimulation. The findings support the hypothesis that the cerebellum is involved in working memory, and this contribution may be disrupted by cTBS.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39172206What 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.