ArticleNeuroprotection (Chichester, England)2026
Noninvasive or minimally invasive neuromodulation in animal models of acute ischemic stroke: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in Neuroprotection (Chichester, England), 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Neuromodulation therapy has emerged as a potential brain cytoprotective strategy in the hyperacute phase of ischemic stroke (IS). This systematic review aimed to evaluate the cytoprotective effects of neuromodulation in animal models of IS. Methods: A systematic search of the MEDLINE, Embase, and LILACS databases was conducted to identify in vivo preclinical studies that investigated noninvasive or minimally invasive neuromodulation therapy administered within 24 h of arterial occlusion and included a control group. The primary outcome was infarct volume, and the secondary outcomes included assessments of neurological function using validated behavioral scales. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed for all outcomes using the Cochrane Review Manager software (version 5.4.1). The protocol was prospectively registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews database (No. CRD42020165347). Results: Thirty studies were included in the qualitative synthesis (2347 reported animals), and 25 studies were eligible for meta-analysis. Most studies employed middle cerebral artery occlusion models. Neuromodulation techniques included electroacupuncture, repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation, transcranial direct current stimulation, and vagus nerve stimulation. Pooled analyses demonstrated that neuromodulation significantly reduced infarct volume both in absolute (standardized mean difference [SMD]: -0.80; Conclusion: Neuromodulation confers brain cytoprotective effects in experimental IS models; however, the high heterogeneity in stimulation parameters and outcomes limits its translational potential. Standardization of experimental protocols and reporting is required to improve reproducibility.
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.