Trial reportBMC medicine2026
The clinical effects and cortical mechanism of rTMS in poststroke lateropulsion: a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in BMC medicine, 2026. 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundOur previous study demonstrated that continuous theta burst stimulation (cTBS) may enhance motor recovery but did not significantly improve pushing behavior in patients with poststroke lateropulsion, necessitating a novel repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) protocol. Furthermore, the cortical hemodynamic mechanisms underlying postural recovery remain unexplored, limiting insight into how rTMS modulates posture-related neuroplasticity in this population.
methodsA randomized, three-arm, patient- and assessor-blinded sham-controlled trial was conducted. Forty-two eligible participants with poststroke lateropulsion were randomly assigned to receive either cTBS or high-frequency rTMS or sham rTMS for 3 weeks. Primary outcomes were Burke lateropulsion scale and scale for contraversive pushing. Secondary outcomes included short falls efficacy scale international, modified Rivermead mobility index, Fugl-Meyer assessment scale-motor domain, and stroke-specific quality of life scale. Cortical hemodynamics were monitored via functional near-infrared spectroscopy over ten posture-related cortices.
resultsA significant main effect of time was observed on Burke lateropulsion scale (BLS) (F = 21.8, P < 0.001), scale for contraversive pushing (F = 16.5, P < 0.001), short falls efficacy scale international (F = 16.3, P < 0.001), modified Rivermead mobility index (F = 26.2, P < 0.001), and Fugl-Meyer assessment scale-motor domain (F = 13.6, P < 0.001). In the subgroup analysis, a significant difference on BLS was observed at T3 between the cTBS and Sham rTMS groups in patients with mild-moderate lateropulsion [- 2.4 (- 4.6, - 0.3), P = 0.026]. Regarding posture-related cortical hemodynamics, a significant three-way interaction was observed in the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex for the mean difference in oxygenated hemoglobin between sitting task and baseline rest (F = 3.9, P = 0.012). However, no significant main effects of time or intervention were detected in this cortex. Multiple linear regression analyses revealed no significant linear relationship between mean difference in oxygenated hemoglobin from sitting task to baseline rest (T3-T0) across ten cortices and either BLS (T3-T0) (R
conclusionscTBS significantly improved the pushing behavior in patients with mild-moderate lateropulsion. These findings support the efficacy of rTMS in improving poststroke lateropulsion and provide a foundation for future studies aimed at optimizing rTMS protocol targeting this condition.
trial registrationURL: http://www.chictr.org.cn . ; Unique identifier: ChiCTR2300068243.
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.