SynthesisSystematic reviews2025
Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for motor function in stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies.
Synthesis in Systematic reviews, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 5 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
18 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Effectiveness of non-pharmacological interventions for lower limb motor impairment in post-stroke hemiplegia: a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2026Pooled it
- Impact of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation combined with traditional Chinese Tuina for stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Annals of medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Effectiveness of dual-site transcranial magnetic stimulation on motor function and activities of daily living in stroke patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Pooled it
- Non-invasive brain stimulation for stroke-related motor impairment and disability: an umbrella review of systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2025Pooled it
- Comparison of the effects of different traditional Chinese exercises on improving the motor function of stroke survivors: a network meta-analysis and systematic review.Frontiers in neurologyPooled it
- Trial
- Article
- [Research progress on the neuromodulation targets in stroke rehabilitation].Sheng wu yi xue gong cheng xue za zhi = Journal of biomedical engineering = Shengwu yixue gongchengxue zazhi · 2026Review
- Robust neurogenesis in chronic stroke monkeys following mesenchymal stem cell transplantation plus intermittent theta-burst stimulation.Signal transduction and targeted therapy · 2026Article
- 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
- Ictal laughter induced by repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in stroke patients: a case series.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Article
- Effect of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation modulating supplementary motor area in stroke rehabilitation: Systematic review of randomized controlled trials.AIMS neuroscience · 2026Review
- Function-specific repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for fine motor rehabilitation in chronic stroke: a case report.Psychoradiology · 2026Article
- FMRI and kinematic dataset for investigating neuroplasticity with function-specific rTMS.Scientific data · 2025Article
- Modern Technologies Supporting Motor Rehabilitation After Stroke: A Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Effects of Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation on Upper and Lower Limb Motor Function and Spasticity After Stroke: A Meta-Analysis.Brain & NeuroRehabilitation · 2025Article
- Article
- The safety of ipsilateral high-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in brain tumour patients.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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed to systematically evaluate the safety and effectiveness of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) in treating motor dysfunction in stroke patients.
methodsA systematic search was conducted in five online databases, namely, Medline, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), CINAHL, and SPORTDiscus, from their inception to July 29, 2024. Studies meeting the predetermined inclusion criteria were included. The data were analyzed using RevMan 5.4.1 software and Stata 15.0. The subgroup analysis was conducted based on various disease stages and intervention frequencies. The overall effects were estimated using either the fixed effects model or the random effects model, with standardized mean differences (SMDs). The level of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework.
resultsA total of 70 studies encompassing 2951 stroke survivors were included. The results of the quantitative analysis revealed that the application of 1 Hz rTMS over the contralesional primary motor cortex (M1) significantly improved motor function during both the early stage (< 1 month) with moderate effect size (n = 443, SMD = 0.44, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.63, P < 0.00001, I
conclusionModerate- to high-quality evidence suggests that 1 Hz rTMS over the contralesional M1 may enhance motor function and independence in ADL during the early stages of stroke and the recovery period (within 6 months) with moderate effect. Nonetheless, as for the efficacy of 3, 5, 10, and 20 Hz rTMS in the treatment of motor dysfunction after stroke, it needs to be further determined. It is important to interpret these findings with caution in clinical practice due to the small sample sizes and low quality of the studies reviewed. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: INPLASY, Registration number is INPLASY202360042. DOI number is https://doi.org/10.37766/inplasy2023.6.0042 .
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.