ReviewAIMS neuroscience2026
Effect of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation modulating supplementary motor area in stroke rehabilitation: Systematic review of randomized controlled trials.
Review in AIMS neuroscience, 2026. 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.
- Neuromodulatory effects of voluntary-motor-effort-driven wrist-hand robot in sensorimotor dynamics after stroke.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is a promising adjunct in stroke rehabilitation, with increasing focus on the supplementary motor area (SMA) for its role in motor and language network reorganization. This systematic review evaluated randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing rTMS targeting the SMA or modulating its connectivity to improve motor and language outcomes in adults after ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was performed across PubMed, Web of Science, and Google Scholar, focusing on peer-reviewed RCTs published in English. Studies were eligible if they involved adults with stroke at any recovery stage and assessed rTMS targeting or analyzing the SMA. Two independent reviewers screened records, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 tool. The review adhered to PRISMA guidelines and was registered in PROSPERO (CRD420251051684). Results: Among 74 screened for full text, five RCTs were included. Across studies, rTMS interventions targeting the SMA or modulating SMA-related networks improved motor and language outcomes in stroke patients. Neuroimaging measures consistently demonstrated increased SMA activation and strengthened SMA-primary motor cortex (M1) connectivity after rTMS, which correlated with clinical improvements. Balance and postural control outcomes showed the most consistent benefits, while upper-limb motor and language improvements varied in magnitude and follow-up duration. Conclusion: Heterogeneity in studies, small sample sizes, and concerns about randomization and reporting limit our ability to draw definitive conclusions. SMA-targeted or network-level rTMS appears to facilitate functional recovery after stroke, supported by neuroimaging evidence of brain network reorganization. Further large, standardized RCTs are necessary to establish optimal protocols, confirm efficacy, and assess long-term outcomes.
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.