SynthesisFrontiers in neurology2025
Efficacy of repetitive peripheral magnetic stimulation on upper limb motor function after stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Synthesis in Frontiers in neurology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
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
Background: Approximately 50-70% of stroke survivors are left with varying degrees of limb paralysis, severely affecting their ability to perform daily activities and engage in rehabilitation. Although conventional rehabilitation interventions, such as task-oriented training and transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), have been widely utilized, their efficacy has been constrained by individual differences and limitations in neuroplastic activation. Repetitive peripheral magnetic stimulation (rPMS), a novel non-invasive neuromodulation technique, directly targets peripheral nerves and muscles to potentially facilitate the remodeling of motor pathways. There is a lack of evaluation regarding the effectiveness of rPMS for improving upper limb motor function and spasticity in stroke patients. Methods: Randomized controlled trials examining the effects of rPMS in post-stroke patients, published up to 20 February 2025, were searched in PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and the Web of Science. Methodological quality was evaluated using the Cochrane Collaboration tool. Meta-analyses were performed using RevMan (version 5.4). The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) method was used to assess the quality of evidence. Results: A total of 12 studies involving 492 patients were included. The results of the meta-analysis indicated that, compared to the control group, the subgroup analyses based on disease stage, stimulation frequency, coil type, stimulation duration, and stimulation intensity showed significant improvements, supported by high-quality evidence. The pooled standardized mean differences (SMDs) were as follows: disease stage, SMD = 0.69 ( Systematic review registration: rPMS improved upper limb motor function, activities of daily living (ADL), and self-care abilities in post-stroke patients, with good acceptability and only mild adverse reactions. Its effect on spasticity was not significant. Systematic review registration: www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, CRD420250637455.
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.