ReviewJournal of pain research2026
Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation for Peripheral Neuropathic Pain: From Cortical Analgesia to Phenotype-Stratified Clinical Translation.
Review in Journal of pain research, 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
Peripheral neuropathic pain (PNP) arises from lesions or diseases of the somatosensory system and remains difficult to treat because peripheral nerve injury is coupled to spinal, thalamic, cortical and affective network changes. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) can engage cortical pain-modulation circuits without implantation or systemic drug exposure, but the field needs a clearer account of which peripheral neuropathic phenotypes, targets and trial designs can convert transient neuromodulation into clinically durable benefit. This narrative, non-systematic review synthesizes randomized trials, systematic reviews, consensus guidance and mechanistic studies through June 2026. The most defensible clinical signal is high-frequency stimulation of the primary motor cortex (M1) contralateral to the painful region. A 2026 meta-analysis assessed with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework included nine randomized sham-controlled trials and 435 patients, and reported reduced pain intensity after rTMS (SMD, -1.11; 95% CI, -1.72 to -0.49). A separate 2026 pathology-stratified review found that postherpetic neuralgia (PHN) had the most consistent phenotype-specific evidence, whereas diabetic neuropathy (DNP), radiculopathy, brachial plexus injury and other peripheral neuropathies remained less certain. We propose an aetiology-stratified translational framework that separates three decisions often conflated in earlier reviews: confirmation of PNP, selection of cortical target and stimulation schedule, and documentation of multidomain response. At present, rTMS should be investigated as an adjunct to, rather than a replacement for, guideline-supported pharmacotherapy. Future studies should pre-specify sensory phenotype, mood and sleep status, target localization, maintenance schedules and responder definitions so that the feasibility and value of a phenotype-stratified rTMS framework can be tested reproducibly rather than assumed from short-term analgesic 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.