SynthesisFrontiers in neurology
Safety of MST in clinical application: a systematic review of randomized controlled studies.
Synthesis in Frontiers in neurology. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Magnetic seizure therapy (MST) is an innovative neurostimulation technique. While MST shares similarities with other neuromodulation techniques, such as electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) and transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), most research has predominantly focused on its efficacy. However, there is a notable scarcity of studies addressing MST's safety. Therefore, the primary aim of this review is to synthesize the available safety data, contributing to a more balanced understanding of this promising treatment modality. Methods: Eight databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CNKI, CBM, VIP, and Wanfang Data) were searched up to August 2024. The evaluation process was strictly adhered to by the Cochrane Risk of Bias assessment tool and RevMan 5.4. Results: Of the 507 potential studies identified, after excluding duplicate studies, we reviewed the titles and abstracts of 217 studies, 149 of which were excluded. The full text of 68 studies was obtained and assessed against the inclusion and exclusion criteria, with 19 studies meeting the inclusion criteria. The therapeutic device and treatment parameters for MST are still being investigated, and the mechanism of MST is unclear, but there is almost consistent agreement on the efficacy and safety of MST. Conclusion: This study is the first systematic review of the safety of MST, and the findings suggest that MST can be used as an alternative treatment for certain psychiatric disorders with few side effects. Therefore, larger samples and more randomized controlled double-blind trials are needed in the future better to examine the clinical efficacy and safety of MST.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.