ReviewNeurology international2026
Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation in Migraine: Clinical Outcomes and Neurobiological Mechanisms-A Systematic Review.
Review in Neurology international, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMigraine is a highly prevalent neurological disorder associated with substantial disability and socioeconomic burden. Although pharmacological therapies remain the mainstay of treatment, their effectiveness may be limited by incomplete response and adverse effects. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) has emerged as a non-invasive neuromodulatory technique that may modulate cortical excitability and pain-processing networks involved in migraine pathophysiology. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the current evidence regarding the efficacy and safety of rTMS compared with sham stimulation in individuals with migraine.
methodsA systematic search was conducted in PubMed (MEDLINE), PsycNet, and Ovid (including MEDLINE and Embase) from database inception to December 2025 in accordance with PRISMA 2020 guidelines. Studies investigating rTMS in adults with migraine and including a sham comparator were eligible for inclusion. Data regarding study design, participant characteristics, rTMS parameters, outcomes, and adverse events were extracted using a predefined template. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool.
resultsSeven studies comprising a total of 301 participants were included. Most trials evaluated high-frequency rTMS targeting the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. Across studies, rTMS was generally associated with reductions in migraine frequency and severity compared with sham stimulation, although results varied depending on stimulation parameters and study design. Treatment was consistently well tolerated, with only mild and transient adverse effects reported. However, considerable heterogeneity was observed in diagnostic criteria, stimulation protocols, outcome measures, and follow-up duration.
conclusionsPreliminary evidence suggests that rTMS may represent a promising and well-tolerated neuromodulatory approach for migraine management. Nevertheless, methodological variability, limited sample sizes, and concerns regarding risk of bias restrict definitive conclusions. Larger randomized controlled trials with standardized protocols and longer follow-up periods are needed to clarify the clinical role of rTMS in migraine treatment.
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.