ArticleEuropean archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience2026
Theta burst stimulation with 80 and 120% resting motor threshold do not differ in their antidepressant efficacy: a retrospective analysis.
Article in European archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience, 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
backgroundrTMS, particularly intermittent theta burst stimulation (iTBS), is an effective treatment for treatment-resistant depression; however, the optimal stimulation intensity remains uncertain. Clinical protocols typically use intensities between 80 and 120% of resting motor threshold (RMT), but direct comparative evidence is limited.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective analysis of 215 patients with unipolar or bipolar depression who received iTBS at either 120% RMT (n = 108) or 80% RMT (n = 107). Depression severity was assessed using the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD-21) and Major Depression Inventory (MDI) before and after treatment. Response (≥ 50% symptom reduction) and remission (HAMD-21 ≤ 7; MDI ≤ 14) rates were compared between groups using mixed ANOVAs, with Bonferroni correction for multiple comparisons (p < .025). In addition, non-inferiority analyses were performed.
resultsBoth groups showed large, significant symptom reductions (HAMD-21: F(1,213) = 250.98, p < .001, partial η² = 0.541; MDI: F(1,213) = 247.45, p < .001, partial η² = 0.537). No significant group effects or group × time interactions emerged for either scale. In a formal non-inferiority analysis (ANCOVA adjusting for baseline severity), 80% RMT was non-inferior to 120% RMT on the HAMD-21 (adjusted difference - 0.90, 95% CI [- 2.61, 0.82]; margin 2.25 points), a result robust across sensitivity analyses. Response rates ranged from 30.84 to 38.32% and remission rates from 23.36 to 31.48%, with no significant differences between intensity groups. Side effects occurred in 20.56% (80% RMT) versus 27.77% (120% RMT) of patients. Notably, treatment-site pain necessitating intensity reduction occurred exclusively in the 120% RMT group (n = 5, 4.6%).
conclusioniTBS at 80% RMT produced antidepressant outcomes non-inferior to iTBS at 120% RMT on the HAMD-21, with supportive MDI findings and better tolerability. These findings suggest a broader intensity range for antidepressant effects of iTBS and support the systematic investigation of lower-intensity protocols.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42799904What 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.