SynthesisFrontiers in psychology2026
Efficacy of non-invasive brain stimulation for post-stroke depression: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in psychology, 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
Objective: Post-stroke depression (PSD) is a common neuropsychiatric complication after stroke and is associated with poorer functional recovery and quality of life. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the efficacy and safety of non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS), specifically repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), for PSD. Methods: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, and Scopus were searched from inception to April 2025. Randomized controlled trials comparing rTMS or tDCS with sham stimulation, placebo, usual care, or other control interventions in adults with PSD were eligible. Standardized mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for depressive symptoms and secondary outcomes. Fixed- or random-effects models were selected according to heterogeneity. Results: Seventeen randomized controlled trials involving 917 participants were included. Compared with control interventions, NIBS was associated with a greater reduction in depressive symptoms (SMD = -1.24, 95% CI: -1.74 to -0.73, Conclusion: Current randomized evidence suggests that rTMS and tDCS may improve depressive symptoms in patients with PSD and appear generally well tolerated. However, the certainty of these findings is limited by substantial heterogeneity, small sample sizes in several trials, and variation in stimulation protocols. Further well-designed trials are needed to define optimal stimulation parameters, treatment timing, and long-term clinical effects.
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.