ArticleTranscranial magnetic stimulation (2024)2025
Identifying patients with non-response for an extension of TMS treatments for depression: A retrospective analysis of clinical response conversion.
Article in Transcranial magnetic stimulation (2024), 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.
- Antipsychotic co-medication and treatment response to rTMS and iTBS in depression: Data from clinical records from two independent clinical sites.Journal of psychopharmacology (Oxford, England) · 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Introduction: Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS) is an FDA-approved treatment for Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) which traditionally consists of 30 sessions of daily treatment followed by a taper phase of 6 sessions. Generally, over 50 % show a significant improvement in MDD symptoms; however, there are many patients who show a trend of improvement but have not have yet crossed that threshold defining meaningful clinical response. Extending the acute course with more sessions may optimize outcomes for the treatment course, however little data exist to inform which patients would benefit from treatment extension. In a retrospective analysis of naturalistic treatment data, we examined variables association with "conversion" of patients from nonresponder to responder status following extension of the acute course by at least 5 sessions. Methods: Response was defined as ≥ 50 % reduction from baseline score on the Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Self Report (IDS-SR). Of 485 treatment courses reviewed, we identified 40 patient series where a course extension (≥41 treatments) was given to patients who had not achieved response at treatment 30. In 21 treatment series, the patient "converted" to responder status by end of the course. Mixed model ANOVAs of IDSSR scores were used to compare the groups and identify features associated with conversion to response with additional sessions. Results: In 21 treatment series (representing 17 unique individuals), patients converted from nonresponse to response with additional treatment sessions beyond 30. Greater degree of IDS-SR improvement from baseline to treatment 30 was significantly associated with conversion to responder status. A 26 % reduction in IDS-SR total by treatment 30 showed 77.5 % accuracy in classifying whether or not a patient would ultimately respond to a 10-session course extension. Conclusion: Extension of the acute TMS course beyond 30 sessions is effective in converting a subset of nonresponding patients into treatment responders. The patients that were most likely to benefit from extension were those that improved the most by treatment 30. While these data may begin to inform extension criteria research, further study is needed to determine a clinically reliable threshold for selection of patients for an extension.
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.