ArticleCNS neuroscience & therapeutics2025
Effects of Cerebellar Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation at Different Frequencies on Working Memory: An EEG Study.
Article in CNS neuroscience & therapeutics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Effects of Cerebellar Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation at Different Frequencies on Working Memory: An EEG Study.CNS neuroscience & therapeutics · 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe cerebellum serves as an important target for non-invasive cognitive regulation because of its involvement in diverse cognitive processes via cerebro-cerebellar circuits. However, the efficiency of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) in different cognitive behavior protocols remains elusive.
objectiveTo investigate changes in working memory and behavioral performance after different cerebellar rTMS to provide objective neurobiological guidance for optimizing cerebellar TMS parameters.
methodsA total of 75 healthy adult volunteers underwent rTMS at various frequencies (1, 5, 10, and 20 Hz) or received sham stimulation. Electroencephalogram recordings were captured in the resting state and 2-back working memory tasks, both before and after stimulation. Behavioral results, event-related potential (ERP) waveforms and spectrum, and brain network topology changes were compared among the groups and rTMS conditions.
resultsBehavioral results significantly differed between the 5 Hz stimulation and sham groups. Analysis of ERP data suggested that 5 Hz stimulation significantly increased P150 amplitude compared with sham. Time-frequency analysis showed enhanced θ and α oscillations after 5 Hz stimulation, with α oscillations significantly higher than those in sham stimulation. Resting state brain network analysis demonstrated increased θ band global efficiency and whole brain local efficiency after 5 Hz stimulation. In contrast, 20 Hz stimulation only reduced the shortest path length. In the 5 Hz stimulation group, P150 amplitude and α oscillation were significantly correlated with the reaction time.
conclusionTaken together, rTMS at 5 Hz applied to the cerebellar Crus II region significantly enhances neural oscillatory activity and improves working memory.
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.