Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38520639›Full record

SynthesisNeurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology2024

Comparative efficacy of different noninvasive brain stimulation protocols on upper-extremity motor function and activities of daily living after stroke: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Ling-Ling Li, Jia-Jia Wu, Kun-Peng Li, Jing Jin, Yun-Ting Xiang, Xu-Yun Hua, Mou-Xiong Zheng, Jian-Guang Xu

Abstract readSystematic ReviewComparative StudyNetwork Meta-Analysis
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Ling-Ling Li *Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai, 201203, China.
Jia-Jia Wu *Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai, 201203, China.
Kun-Peng LiShanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai, 201203, China.
Jing JinShanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai, 201203, China.
Yun-Ting XiangShanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai, 201203, China.
Xu-Yun HuaShanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai, 201203, China. huaxuyun@shutcm.edu.cn.
Mou-Xiong ZhengShanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai, 201203, China. zhengmouxiong@shutcm.edu.cn.
Jian-Guang XuShanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai, 201203, China. xjg@shutcm.edu.cn.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0451-7923
Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine · CN

Funding

National Key R&D Program of China 2018YFC2001600National Key R&D Program of China 2018YFC2001604National Natural Science Foundation of China 81871836National Natural Science Foundation of China 82172554National Natural Science Foundation of China 82272583National Natural Science Foundation of China 82272589
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The objectives of the study were to systematically evaluate the rehabilitation effect of noninvasive brain stimulation (NIBS) on upper extremity motor function and activities of daily living in stroke patients and to prioritize various stimulation protocols for reliable evidence-based medical recommendations in patients with upper extremity motor dysfunction after stroke. Web of Science, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, CNKI, Wanfang, VIP, and CBM were searched to collect all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of NIBS to improve upper extremity motor function in stroke patients. The retrieval time was from the establishment of all databases to May 2023. According to the Cochrane system evaluation manual, the quality of the included studies was evaluated, and the data were extracted. Statistical analysis was carried out by using RevMan 5.3, R 4.3.0, and Stata 17.0 software. Finally, 94 RCTs were included, with a total of 5546 patients. Meta-analysis showed that NIBS improved the Fugl-Meyer assessment (FMA) score (mean difference (MD) = 6.51, 95% CI 6.20 ~ 6.82, P < 0.05), MBI score (MD = 7.69, 95% CI 6.57 ~ 8.81, P < 0.05), ARAT score (MD = 5.06, 95% CI 3.85 ~ 6.27, P < 0.05), and motor evoked potential (MEP) amplitude. The modified Ashworth scale score (MD =  - 0.37, 95% CI - 0.60 to - 0.14, P < 0.05), National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score (MD =  - 2.17, 95% CI - 3.32 to - 1.11, P < 0.05), incubation period of MEP (MD =  - 0.72, 95% CI - 1.06 to - 0.38, P < 0.05), and central motor conduction time (MD =  - 0.90, 95% CI - 1.29 to - 0.50, P < 0.05) were decreased in stroke patients. Network meta-analysis showed that the order of interventions in improving FMA scores from high to low was anodal-transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) (surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) = 83.7%) > cathodal-tDCS (SUCRA = 80.2%) > high-frequency (HF)-repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) (SUCRA = 68.5%) > low-frequency (LF)-rTMS (SUCRA = 66.5%) > continuous theta burst stimulation (cTBS) (SUCRA = 54.2%) > bilateral-tDCS (SUCRA = 45.2%) > intermittent theta burst stimulation (iTBS) (SUCRA = 34.1%) > sham-NIBS (SUCRA = 16.0%) > CR (SUCRA = 1.6%). In terms of improving MBI scores, the order from high to low was anodal-tDCS (SUCRA = 88.7%) > cathodal-tDCS (SUCRA = 85.4%) > HF-rTMS (SUCRA = 63.4%) > bilateral-tDCS (SUCRA = 56.0%) > LF-rTMS (SUCRA = 54.2%) > iTBS (SUCRA = 32.4%) > sham-NIBS (SUCRA = 13.8%) > CR (SUCRA = 6.1%). NIBS can effectively improve upper extremity motor function and activities of daily living after stroke. Among the various NIBS protocols, anodal-tDCS demonstrated the most significant intervention effect, followed by cathodal-tDCS and HF-rTMS.

Indexed as

Activities of Daily LivingStrokeStroke RehabilitationUpper ExtremityHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRecovery of FunctionTranscranial Direct Current StimulationTranscranial Magnetic StimulationActivities of daily livingNetwork meta-analysisNoninvasive brain stimulationStrokeSystematic reviewUpper-extremity motor function

Identifiers

PMID38520639
OpenAlexW4393113896

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 Socratic graph.