Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40143889›Full record

ArticleNeuroscience insights2025

Surface Versus Penetrative rTMS Stimulation May Be More Effective for AD Patients with Cerebrovascular Disease.

Brian J Lithgow, Chandan Saha, Zeinab Dastgheib, Zahra Moussavi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Neuroscience insights, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors.

Brian J LithgowBiomedical Engineering, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0005-9529-3284
Chandan SahaBiomedical Engineering, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8814-3003
Zeinab DastgheibBiomedical Engineering, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2619-3678
Zahra MoussaviBiomedical Engineering, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9202-949X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (rTMS) has been applied as an investigational therapy for Alzheimer's Disease (AD). The recent largest (N = 135) double-blind study with 6 months post-treatment follow-up investigating rTMS efficacy as a treatment for AD found about 72% of participants in each group of active and sham were positively responsive to rTMS (using Magstim AirFilm active and sham coils). Since the used sham coil produced about 25.3% of the peak active stimulus, it was hypothesized it could evoke a measurable response in AD patients. This study looks at the details of the above study's sham responses to determine why and how such a response might occur and how cerebrovascular symptomatology may have impacted that response. In the above-mentioned study, 90 and 45 patients were randomly assigned to active and sham groups, respectively. Those with modified Hachinski Ischemic Scores (HIS) below and above 2 were labeled AD

Indexed as

ADAScogAlzheimer’s Diseasecerebrovascular diseaserTMS

Identifiers

PMID40143889
PMCPMC11938491

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.