ReviewAnnals of general psychiatry2025
Non-invasive brain stimulation for borderline personality disorder: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Review in Annals of general psychiatry, 2025. 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.
- Brain Stimulation for Psychiatric Disorders: Emerging Evidence and New Perspectives-2nd Edition.Brain sciences · 2026Article
- Ventrolateral prefrontal-amygdala repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) modulation of impulsivity in borderline personality disorder: a proof-of-concept study.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Accelerated Magnetic Seizure Therapy for Non-Suicidal Self-Injury in Adolescents With Bipolar Depression.CNS neuroscience & therapeutics · 2026Article
- Correlates of Anti-Toxoplasma IgG Antibodies in Females with Borderline Personality Disorder: A Pilot Cross-Sectional Study.Neuropsychiatric disease and treatment · 2026Article
- Understanding the Borderline Brain: A Review of Neurobiological Findings in Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD).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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionBorderline Personality Disorder (BPD) is a complex neuropsychiatric condition characterized by four main symptom domains: emotion dysregulation, behavioral dysregulation, self-image disturbances, and interpersonal instability. While psychotherapy remains the primary treatment, there is a need for additional effective interventions. Given the neuromodulatory effects of non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) techniques, such as transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), these methods may hold potential for addressing BPD symptoms.
methodsA systematic review and network meta-analysis were conducted following PRISMA guidelines. A literature search (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane CENTRAL) identified comparative studies assessing the effects of NIBS in BPD. The primary outcome was impulsivity, measured by the Barratt Impulsivity Scale (BIS-11). Secondary outcomes included Depressive symptoms, which were evaluated using different scales such as the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD) and the Beck depression Inventory (BDI) scale, and anxiety symptoms were evaluated using the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAMA).
resultsFive studies with a total of 103 patients were included. Regarding impulsivity, tDCS 2 mA showed a significant reduction compared to the control group (MD = -11.67, 95% CI [-21.44, -1.90]). For depressive symptoms, TMS 20 Hz ranked highest (SMD = -1.97, 95% CI [-3.51, -0.43]), followed by tDCS 2 mA (SMD = -1.65, 95% CI [-2.97, -0.34]). In terms of anxiety, both TMS 5 Hz (MD = -12.29, 95% CI [-24.57, -0.01]) and tDCS 2 mA (MD = -11.81, 95% CI [-17.39, -6.23]) showed significant differences.
conclusionPreliminary evidence suggests potential efficacy of non-invasive brain stimulation for BPD, with well-tolerated side effects with well-tolerated side effects. Although there are noticeable statistically significant differences between the interventions and control groups, the results are inconclusive due to the small sample.
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.