SynthesisBMC neurology2026
A systematic review of brain stimulation in functional seizures.
Synthesis in BMC neurology, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFunctional (dissociative) seizures (FDS) are disabling neurological disorders characterized by significant diagnostic and therapeutic challenges. Brain stimulation (BS) techniques are being investigated as potential, neurobiologically-grounded interventions. This systematic review aims to synthesize and evaluate the existing evidence on the therapeutic and diagnostic applications of various BS modalities in patients with FDS.
methodsFollowing PRISMA 2020 guidelines, a systematic search was conducted across PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases from their inception. We included all original research studies, regardless of design, that investigated invasive or non-invasive brain stimulation for therapeutic or diagnostic purposes in patients with a confirmed diagnosis of FDS. Due to substantial clinical and methodological heterogeneity across studies, a narrative synthesis was performed instead of a quantitative meta-analysis.
resultsThe search yielded 4963 records, from which 19 studies (11 therapeutic, 8 diagnostic) met the inclusion criteria after screening. Therapeutic studies, predominantly case reports and small series, indicated that non-invasive techniques such as repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), intermittent theta-burst stimulation (iTBS), and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) have been associated with reductions in seizure frequency and comorbid psychiatric symptoms in preliminary reports. The right temporoparietal junction (rTPJ) emerged as a commonly targeted region, with preliminary reports suggesting potential benefit. Reported modulation of other regions, including the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) and anterior cingulate cortex (ACC), lends support to a network-based pathophysiology for FDS. Diagnostic studies confirmed the utility of provocative techniques like photic stimulation in inducing events during video-EEG monitoring. Adverse effects were generally mild and transient, with headache being the most common.
conclusionBrain stimulation, particularly non-invasive modalities targeting key nodes within fronto-limbic-motor circuits, represents a field of significant research interest and a potential future therapeutic avenue for FDS. The evidence supports a shift towards conceptualizing FDS as a heterogeneous network disorder, necessitating phenotype-guided treatment strategies. Future research must prioritize large-scale, sham-controlled randomized clinical trials with standardized protocols and long-term follow-up to definitively establish efficacy and optimize treatment parameters.
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.