SynthesisFrontiers in aging neuroscience2025
Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation across neurodegenerative diseases: a systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in aging neuroscience, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: We summarized the existing clinical evidence of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) for Parkinson's Disease (PD) and Alzheimer's Disease (AD) and conducted a series of dose-response meta-analyses to determine the curve relationship between the number of pulses and the effect size of the treatment. Methods: Existing evidence was retrieved from five databases, and relevant outcome data on rTMS treatment for motor and non-motor symptoms of PD and AD were collected. Data were analyzed using R software to assess effect size using standardized mean differences (SMD) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Heterogeneity testing was performed to assess differences in efficacy among the evidence, and restricted cubic spline (RCS) was used to fit the dose-response curves. Results: A total of 51 publications were included, involving 1,938 subjects. We found that for PD patients, the total number of rTMS pulses showed significant bell-shaped curves in TUG (χ Conclusion: Our dose-response meta-analysis results show that rTMS demonstrates significant efficacy in certain motor and non-motor symptoms of PD and AD. The number of rTMS pulses presents a typical bell-shaped curve for these symptoms, indicating that more number of rTMS pulses is not always better; beyond a certain threshold, increasing the number of rTMS pulses correlates negatively with therapeutic efficacy.
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.