Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41784828›Full record

SynthesisJournal of neural transmission (Vienna, Austria : 1996)2026

Non-invasive brain stimulation for treating cognitive and neuropsychiatric non-motor symptoms in Parkinson's disease and atypical parkinsonism: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Elisa Mantovani, Eleonora Bertoncello, Mirko Filippetti, Alessandro Picelli, Michele Tinazzi, Stefano Tamburin

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of neural transmission (Vienna, Austria : 1996), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. 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

6 authors.

Elisa MantovaniSection of Neurology, Department of Neurosciences, Biomedicine and Movement Sciences, University of Verona, Piazzale L.A. Scuro 10, 37134, Verona, Italy. elisa.mantovani@univr.it.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3717-7697
Eleonora BertoncelloSection of Neurology, Department of Neurosciences, Biomedicine and Movement Sciences, University of Verona, Piazzale L.A. Scuro 10, 37134, Verona, Italy.
Mirko FilippettiSection of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Department of Neurosciences, Biomedicine and Movement Sciences, University of Verona, Piazzale L.A. Scuro 10, 37134, Verona, Italy.
Alessandro PicelliSection of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Department of Neurosciences, Biomedicine and Movement Sciences, University of Verona, Piazzale L.A. Scuro 10, 37134, Verona, Italy.
Michele TinazziSection of Neurology, Department of Neurosciences, Biomedicine and Movement Sciences, University of Verona, Piazzale L.A. Scuro 10, 37134, Verona, Italy.
Stefano TamburinSection of Neurology, Department of Neurosciences, Biomedicine and Movement Sciences, University of Verona, Piazzale L.A. Scuro 10, 37134, Verona, Italy. stefano.tamburin@univr.it.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1561-2187

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cognitive and neuropsychiatric non-motor symptoms (NMS) are common in Parkinson’s disease (PD) and atypical parkinsonism (AP), yet their management is difficult. Non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) may offer a therapeutic option. To provide a joint and comprehensive overview of studies on NIBS to treat cognitive and neuropsychiatric NMS in PD and AP. We searched for randomized, sham-controlled trials on repeated NIBS sessions for treating cognitive and neuropsychiatric NMS in PD and AP. Studies were categorised by NIBS technique/protocol, NMS, and stimulation target. We found 27 studies on repetitive transcranial stimulation (rTMS; N = 1309 patients, range 18–106) and 7 studies on transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS; N = 221, 10–77). Cognition was assessed in 17 rTMS and 6 tDCS studies, depression by 24 rTMS and 4 tDCS studies, anxiety by 11 rTMS and 1 tDCS studies, apathy by 4 rTMS and 1 tDCS studies, psychosis by 1 tDCS study. Variability in NIBS targets and parameters, outcome measures, treatment duration and follow-up raised some concerns (N = 26) or high risk of bias (N = 8). The meta-analysis on PD suggested that, despite high heterogeneity and low-to-moderate certainty of evidence, excitatory rTMS of the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) and the primary motor cortex, and inhibitory rTMS of the right DLPFC may be effective for depression and anxiety. Methodological heterogeneity impeded robust conclusions on the efficacy of NIBS for cognitive and neuropsychiatric NMS in PD and AP. We propose a roadmap for the design of future studies.

Indexed as

Cognitive DysfunctionParkinson DiseaseTranscranial Direct Current StimulationTranscranial Magnetic StimulationHumansParkinsonian DisordersRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicAtypical parkinsonismCognitionNeuropsychiatric manifestationsNon-invasive brain stimulationNon-motor symptomsParkinson’s disease

Identifiers

PMID41784828
PMCPMC13149570

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.