SynthesisBMC psychiatry2025
Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for treating post-stroke depression: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC psychiatry, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 2 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Efficacy of non-invasive brain stimulation for post-stroke depression: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Pooled it
- Early emotional interventions for post-stroke functional prognosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in neurologyPooled it
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo systematically evaluate the effects of different modes of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) on depression in post-stroke depression (PSD) patients using the network meta-analysis method.
methodsPubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Embase, Wanfang Data, CNKI, VIP, and CBM were searched for randomized controlled trials on rTMS for PSD from the time the database was constructed until April 20th, 2024. Two researchers independently conducted screenings to extract the relevant literature. The meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4.1 software. Network meta-analysis of depression scores was performed using Stata 17.0 software and R 4.4.1 software.
resultsTwelve studies involving four different rTMS modalities were included. The results of the meta-analysis revealed that rTMS significantly improved depression (SMD = -1.47, 95% CI [-1.97, -0.97]) and activity of daily living (ADL) (SMD = 0.78, 95% CI [0.52, 1.04]) in patients with PSD. The follow-up results revealed that rTMS significantly improved depression in the long term (SMD = -1.74, 95% CI [-2.32, -1.17]). The results of the network meta-analysis revealed that dual-rTMS (SMD = -2.33, 95% CI [-3.16, -1.50]), HF-rTMS (SMD = -1.62, 95% CI [-2.11, -1.13]), iTBS (SMD = -1.57, 95% CI [-2.56, -0.57]), and LF-rTMS (SMD = -0.80, 95% CI [-1.36, -0.23]) significantly improved depression compared with sham stimulation. The SUCRA values in descending order were dual-rTMS (95.9%) > HF-rTMS (65.0%) > iTBS (61.9%) > LF-rTMS (27.1%).
conclusionsTwenty minutes of 4-week dual-rTMS on the DLPFC of PSD patients may produce better therapeutic effects. High-quality, large-sample, standardized RCT trials can be conducted to further test the scientific validity of the findings.
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.