SynthesisMedicine2026
Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for the treatment of restless legs syndrome: A meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Medicine, 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
Abstract
backgroundThe benefit of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) in patients with Restless Legs Syndrome (RLS) is uncertain. This study was performed to explore the therapeutic effect of rTMS in treating RLS.
methodsDatabases including PubMed, EMbase, the Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and Wanfang database were searched from their inception to May 1, 2026. Eligible studies comparing rTMS with sham stimulation were included. Data were analyzed using Review Manager Version 5.3.
resultsFour studies were included in the meta-analysis. The overall pooled analysis confirmed that rTMS could effectively reduce International RLS-Rating Scale (IRLS-RS) scores (mean difference [MD] = 6.46, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 4.44 -8.48, P < .00001) and Pittsburgh sleep quality index (PSQI) scores (MD = 4.80, 95% CI: 3.51-6.08, P < .00001) at different follow-up periods. Meanwhile, the overall pooled analysis confirmed that rTMS could effectively reduce IRLS-RS scores (MD = 7.79, 95% CI: 3.90-11.68, P < .0001) and PSQI scores (MD = 5.58, 95% CI: 3.81-7.35, P < .00001) in the subgroup analysis by RLS subtype. However, rTMS showed no significant effect on PSQI scores in primary RLS (MD = 1.86, 95% CI: -2.65-6.37, P = .42). In addition, the overall pooled analysis confirmed that both low-frequency and high-frequency rTMS could effectively reduce IRLS-RS scores (MD = 7.79, 95% CI: 3.90-11.68, P < .0001) and PSQI scores (MD = 5.58, 95% CI: 3.81-7.35, P < .00001). Finally, the overall pooled analysis confirmed that rTMS could not significantly reduce Hamilton anxiety scale and Hamilton depression scale scores in subgroup analyses of follow-up period, RLS subtype, or rTMS frequency (P > .05).
conclusionrTMS might alleviate core limb discomfort symptoms measured by IRLS-RS and improve sleep quality assessed by PSQI in patients with RLS. However, rTMS might not be effective in improving symptoms of anxiety and depression. To further confirm the conclusion, more large randomized controlled trials are necessary.
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.