ReviewClinical psychopharmacology and neuroscience : the official scientific journal of the Korean College of Neuropsychopharmacology2025
Non-inferiority of Accelerated vs. Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation in Major Depressive Disorder: A Systematic Review.
Review in Clinical psychopharmacology and neuroscience : the official scientific journal of the Korean College of Neuropsychopharmacology, 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.
- Accelerated DMN-targeted cTBS improves processing speed deficits in schizophrenia.Molecular psychiatry · 2026Article
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
Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is a non-invasive neuromodulation technique used to treat major depressive disorder (MDD), particularly in patients with treatment resistant depression. More recently, accelerated transcranial magnetic stimulation (aTMS) has shown comparable efficacy while offering a faster treatment option. This review assesses whether aTMS is non-inferior to rTMS. This systematic review compared aTMS and rTMS protocols for MDD treatment. Studies were identified through PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science (September 2024). Non-MDD populations and non-aTMS techniques were excluded, such as studies that did not qualify as clinical trials, cohort or randomized controlled trial. Inclusion criteria required direct protocol comparisons and a minimum sample of 10 participants. Bias assessment followed the Cochrane Collaboration's robvis tool. Four studies were included, encompassing a total sample of 219 patients. Results showed symptom improvement across all groups, with accelerated protocols demonstrating faster response in some cases. However, long-term efficacy varied, and no study provided conclusive superiority of one protocol over the other. This study reveals the variability in aTMS protocols and the inconsistency in the depression rating scales selected across studies, noting that the lack of standardised assessment methods limits meta-analytical potential. Short follow-up durations contrast with antidepressant studies, restricting long-term efficacy evaluation. Additionally, improvements in sham methodologies have increased placebo responses, further influencing treatment outcome interpretation. This systematic review highlights the efficacy, tolerability, and cost-effectiveness of aTMS, suggesting its non-inferiority to rTMS and underscoring the need for further research to define the optimal accelerated protocol.
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.