ReviewThe Psychiatric quarterly2026
Systematic Review of rTMS and dTMS in Treatment-Resistant Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder: Target- and Phenotype-Specific Outcomes.
Review in The Psychiatric quarterly, 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
To evaluate the efficacy of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), including repetitive TMS (rTMS) and deep TMS (dTMS), in patients with severe, treatment-resistant obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), specifically examining target- and phenotype-specific outcomes as well as predictors of treatment response. A systematic review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines (PROSPERO: CRD420251003027) searching PubMed and ProQuest (January 2017-April 2024). Methodological quality was appraised using design-specific tools, and certainty of evidence was evaluated using the GRADE framework. Twenty-seven articles representing 23 distinct clinical studies were included (14 high, 12 moderate, and 1 low quality). Active TMS significantly reduced OCD severity on the Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale (Y-BOCS), with secondary gains in depressive and anxiety symptoms assessed by Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D) and Hamilton Anxiety Scale (HAM-A). Evidence certainty varied substantially by anatomical target: Deep TMS (mPFC/ACC) and prefrontal targets (OFC/DLPFC) demonstrated moderate certainty, supported by multiple randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Pre-supplementary motor area (pre-SMA) showed low-to-moderate certainty due to RCT outcome heterogeneity and genetic moderation (SLC6A4 genotype). Supplementary motor area (SMA) evidence was limited to uncontrolled open-label, while VMPFC and PPC targets exhibited very low certainty. Key predictors of enhanced therapeutic response included higher baseline OCD severity (Y-BOCS[Formula: see text]28), older age, lower functional disability, and baseline amygdala hyper-activation during symptom provocation. TMS represents a promising neuromodulation approach for treatment-resistant OCD, with the most robust evidence supporting dTMS and prefrontal targets. Tailoring protocol parameters and stratifying patients based on clinical, genetic, and neurophysiological predictors are critical to optimizing individualized outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42684582What 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.