Trial reportEuropean journal of medical research2025
Effects of deep transcranial magnetic stimulation and repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation on balance and gait in stroke patients.
Trial report in European journal of medical research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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
Abstract
objectivesTo compare the effects of deep transcranial magnetic stimulation (dTMS) and repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) on balance function and gait of stroke patients.
methodsThis randomized, single-blind trial enrolled 66 eligible stroke patients with hemiplegia. These participants were randomly assigned to either the deep transcranial magnetic stimulation (dTMS) group (n = 33) or the repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) group (n = 33). All patients received conventional rehabilitation therapy. Moreover, the dTMS group received dTMS treatment, while the rTMS group received rTMS treatment. The stimulation was administered to the M1 region for a period of 4 weeks. Outcome evaluations were conducted both before and after the intervention. The balance function was assessed using the Berg Balance Scale (BBS) and the Pro-kin balance tester. For evaluating lower limb function and walking ability, the Timed Up and Go (TUG) test was employed. Additionally, a gait analyzer was utilized to perform gait analysis.
resultsFollowing 4 weeks of treatment, both groups showed significant improvements in BBS scores, gait velocity, stride rate, step length, and limits of stability (LOS) compared with the baseline values (all P < 0.001). Notably, the dTMS group exhibited significantly greater improvements in BBS scores (P < 0.01) and gait velocity (P < 0.05) than the rTMS group. However, there were no significant between-group differences in stride rate, step length, or LOS (all P > 0.05). Similarly, both groups demonstrated significant reductions in TUG test time, center of pressure (COP) path length, and COP displacement area compared with the baseline (all P < 0.01). Moreover, the dTMS group exhibited more pronounced decreases in TUG test time (P < 0.01), COP path length (P < 0.05), and COP displacement area (P < 0.05) than the rTMS group.
conclusionBoth dTMS and rTMS effectively improved balance and gait functions in stroke patients. Notably, dTMS demonstrated superior efficacy compared to rTMS in enhancing these parameters, providing evidence to support its clinical utility.
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.