ArticleIBRO neuroscience reports2024
Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation as add-on the rapyin persistent postural-perceptual dizziness.
Article in IBRO neuroscience reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Comparative efficacy of non-pharmacological interventions for persistent postural-perceptual dizziness: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of balance, anxiety, and depression outcomes.Journal of neurology · 2026Pooled it
- Neurotransmitter regulatory networks in persistent postural-perceptual dizziness: potential mechanisms and therapeutic implications.Frontiers in neurology · 2026Review
- Efficacy and Safety Analysis of Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation in Patients with Persistent Postural Perceptual Dizziness: A Single-Center, Single-Blind, Randomized Placebo-Controlled Trial.Neurology and therapy · 2025Article
- Electroconvulsive Therapy for Persistent Postural Perceptual Dizziness: A Case Report.Case reports 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: This study aims to evaluate the clinical effectiveness of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) when used as an add-on therapy for individuals with persistent postural-perceptual dizziness (PPPD). Methods: In this randomized controlled, double-blind trial conducted at Shangluo Central Hospital, patients with PPPD diagnosed in the neurology departments were included. Participants were randomized into a rTMS treatment group and a control group in a 1:1 ratio by the randomized grouping method. Patients in both groups received conventional treatment, with the rTMS treatment group underwent daily rTMS sessions, whereas the control group received sham rTMS treatments following the same schedule. The effectiveness of the treatments was primarily assessed using the Dizziness Handicap Inventory (DHI), Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAMA), and Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD), which measured symptoms of vertigo, anxiety, and depression at baseline, after two weeks, and at the end of four weeks. Findings: Of the 46 participants recruited, 2 were excluded due to contraindications, 22 were randomly assigned to the rTMS treatment group, and 22 were assigned to the control group. Ultimately, 2 withdrew for personal reasons, and data from 42 participants were included in the outcome analysis. HAMA, HAMD and DHI scores were significantly lower in the rTMS treatment group than in the control group after 4 weeks of treatment (p<0.05). A positive correlation was also observed between DHI scores and HAMA or HAMD scores. Conclusions: This pilot study demonstrated that rTMS is a beneficial add-on therapy for patients with PPPD.
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.