Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41523720›Full record

ReviewCureus2026

Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation in Post-stroke Motor Recovery: A Narrative Review.

Jordan Stewart, Karim Alabbas

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cureus, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Jordan StewartGeneral Surgery, Cardiff University, Cardiff, GBR.
Karim AlabbasGeneral Medicine, University Hospital of Wales, Cardiff, GBR.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) can be used as an additional treatment for stroke recovery. Stroke is a major cause of disability in the UK, often leaving survivors with ongoing motor problems. There are different theories on motor recovery after stroke, with some suggesting that undamaged pathways in the brain help compensate for the damage, while others propose that the healthy side of the brain takes over the lost functions. Additionally, there is a model suggesting that the brain's hemispheres compete, with the healthy side inhibiting the affected side. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) uses electromagnetic pulses to stimulate specific areas of the brain, aiming to enhance new pathways and improve patients' ability to move. Studies have shown that rTMS can be effective and safe in stroke rehabilitation, leading to better motor performance. Integrating rTMS into standard stroke rehabilitation programs could have significant benefits; however, more research is needed to determine the best treatment parameters and identify which patients could benefit the most. It is also important to combine rTMS with other therapies, such as physical and occupational therapy, for a comprehensive approach. This review highlights the potential of rTMS as an additional treatment for stroke recovery. By stimulating the brain, rTMS may help improve motor function and enhance rehabilitation outcomes. Further studies are necessary to optimize its use and determine its effectiveness in different stroke patient groups.

Indexed as

physical medicine and rehabilitationrecurrent transcranial magnetic stimulation (rtms)repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rtms)stroketranscranial brain stimulationtranscranial magnetic stimulation (tms)

Identifiers

PMID41523720
PMCPMC12790398

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.