SynthesisBMC psychiatry2026
Efficacy and safety of theta-burst stimulation for obsessive-compulsive disorder: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC psychiatry, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionObsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) is a prevalent psychiatric disorder characterized by intrusive obsessions and repetitive, compulsive behaviors that are difficult to inhibit. Several studies have evaluated the efficacy of theta-burst stimulation (TBS) for alleviating OCD symptoms, reporting potential outcomes in both symptom reduction and functional improvement. This study aimed to synthesize evidence from published randomized clinical trials (RCTs) regarding the clinical effectiveness of TBS in patients with OCD.
methodsWe searched PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Embase databases. A total of eight RCTs and one open-label study were included, each comparing TBS with sham stimulation in relation to the severity of obsessive and compulsive symptoms. The primary measure was the Yale-Brown Obsessive-Compulsive Scale (Y-BOCS) between two groups from baseline to the endpoint (immediate effect) and from baseline to the end of follow-up period (long-term effect). The secondary outcome was depressive symptoms reported by The Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D). Continuous outcomes were pooled as mean differences (MDs), while the dichotomous outcomes were pooled as risk ratios (RRs).
resultsThis review included eight RCTs and one open-label study, comprising a total of 305 patients. According to the immediate action of TBS, it showed significant improvement in only the obsession sub-scale (MD = -1.04, 95%CI [-1.87, -0.22], p = 0.01, I
conclusionThe results showed that TBS could be effective as an adjunctive treatment for OCD in relieving the obsessive-compulsive symptoms, especially the long-term action with well-tolerated adverse 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.