Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39759598›Full record

ReviewCureus2024

Effectiveness of Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation on Executive Function, Attention, and Memory in Stroke Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Ha T Le, Kenta Honma, Hiroki Annaka, Sun Shunxiang, Tsukasa Murakami, Tamon Hiraoka, Tomonori Nomura

Registry-linked trialAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07182344 (Effects of iTBS on Cognitive Control in Children With ADHD), which is not on this map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT07182344 naenrolling by invitationnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Effects of iTBS on Cognitive Control in Children With ADHD: A Randomized, Sham-Controlled Study Integrating EEG During ANT, fNIRS, MRI, and Genetic Markers

TypeinterventionalSponsorNeurolab PlusRan2025 to 2026Enrolled40ConditionsADHD - Attention Deficit Disorder With HyperactivityArmsIntermittent Theta Burst Stimulation to Right DLPFC, Sham Intermittent Theta Burst Stimulation
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. 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

7 authors.

Ha T LeDepartment of Rehabilitation, Hai Duong Medical Technical University, Hai Duong, VNM.
Kenta HonmaDepartment of Occupational Therapy, Faculty of Rehabilitation, Niigata University of Health and Welfare, Niigata, JPN.
Hiroki AnnakaDepartment of Occupational Therapy, Faculty of Rehabilitation, Niigata University of Health and Welfare, Niigata, JPN.
Sun ShunxiangGraduate School, Niigata University of Health and Welfare, Niigata, JPN.
Tsukasa MurakamiDepartment of Occupational Therapy, Faculty of Rehabilitation, Niigata University of Health and Welfare, Niigata, JPN.
Tamon HiraokaGraduate School, Niigata University of Health and Welfare, Niigata, JPN.
Tomonori NomuraDepartment of Occupational Therapy, Faculty of Rehabilitation, Niigata University of Health and Welfare, Niigata, JPN.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is an effective intervention for improving cognitive impairment in patients with stroke. However, its effectiveness in the subdomains of cognition is conflicting and not clearly established. This systematic review assessed the efficacy of TMS in improving executive function, attention, and memory in this population. Seven databases, including PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Library, Cumulated Index in Nursing and Allied Health Literature, NeuroBITE, Physiotherapy Evidence Database, and OTseeker, were searched for indexed literature until July 2024 to identify all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of this effect in stroke patients. This systematic review was performed by Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines and the Handbook of the Cochrane Library and evaluated the quality of evidence using the Risk of Bias 2 tools and grading of recommendations assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE) systems. Meta-analyses were performed using standardized mean difference (SMD) (Hedge's g) as the effect measure, and subgroups were performed to explore potential outcomes. The research included 13 RCTs involving 496 patients with stroke. The results indicated that TMS could affect executive function (six RCTs with SMD = 0.55; 95% confidence interval, CI = 0.04-1.05) and memory (nine RCTs with SMD = 0.57; 95% CI = 0.25-0.89) in patients with stroke. However, the effectiveness of TMS on attention (five RCTs with SMD = 0.32; 95% CI = -0.1 to 0.75) was not clear. The quality of the results varied between very low and low according to the GRADE approach. In conclusion, TMS may affect executive function and memory, but not attention. The quality of the evidence for the outcomes varied from very low to low owing to heterogeneity and bias; therefore, the results should be considered with caution, and more rigorous evidence is needed.

Indexed as

attentioncognitive impairmentexecutive functionmemorymeta-analysisstrokesystematic reviewtranscranial magnetic stimulation

Identifiers

PMID39759598
PMCPMC11700524

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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 Socratic graph.