ArticleBrain sciences2024
Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation for the Treatment of Depression in a Real-World Setting: Findings from a Cohort Study.
Article in Brain sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparing transcranial magnetic stimulation and esketamine treatment response trajectories in resistant depression.Journal of affective disorders · 2026Article
- Lurasidone vs. Other Antipsychotics as Augmentation Strategies for Clozapine in Treatment-resistant Schizophrenia: An Observational Multicenter Prospective Study.Current neuropharmacology · 2026Observational
- Psilocybin and ayahuasca in treatment-resistant depression: clinical evidence, methodological constraints and ethical challenges: a narrative review.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Review
- Non-inferiority of Accelerated vs. Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation in Major Depressive Disorder: A Systematic Review.Clinical psychopharmacology and neuroscience : the official scientific journal of the Korean College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2025Review
- Personalizing esketamine treatment in TRD and TRBD: the role of mentalization, cognitive rigidity, psychache, and suicidality.Frontiers in psychiatry · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesIn the past two decades, significant advancements in neuromodulation techniques have occurred, such as transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) for treatment-resistant depression (TRD). According to the assumption that repeated stimulation within a condensed timeframe can yield sustained efficacy, an accelerated protocol may be more effective in reducing time to response. With those premises, this study aimed to evaluate a sample of TRD patients treated with standard repetitive TMS (rTMS) and accelerated rTMS (arTMS).
methodsNine subjects were treated with standard rTMS and 19 with arTMS. Psychometric assessment was made at the baseline and one week, one month, and three months after the treatment. A linear mixed-effect regression was performed along with other appropriate statistical analyses.
resultsA significant improvement over time was observed for both depressive and cognitive symptoms. Moreover, considering the reduction in the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale scores, a better treatment response was observed in subjects treated with arTMS (
conclusionsOur findings showed a significant difference between the two protocols in terms of clinical response. Although further studies are needed to confirm the superiority of arTMS, the better cost-effectiveness of this technique should be considered.
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.