SynthesisFrontiers in psychiatry2026
Efficacy and safety of intermittent theta-burst stimulation versus continuous theta-burst stimulation for major depressive disorder and bipolar depression: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2026. 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The therapeutic efficacy and safety profiles of daily or accelerated intermittent theta-burst stimulation (iTBS) in comparison to daily or accelerated continuous theta-burst stimulation (cTBS) for patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) or bipolar depression (BD) remain inadequately explored, respectively. This systematic review evaluates the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of daily or accelerated iTBS compared to daily or accelerated cTBS in patients with MDD or BD. Methods: A comprehensive search was conducted in both Chinese (WanFang, China National Knowledge Infrastructure) and English (PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library) databases to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) examining the efficacy and safety of daily or accelerated iTBS compared to daily or accelerated cTBS in patients with MDD or BD. Results: Three studies (n = 87) investigated the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of daily iTBS versus daily cTBS (1 RCT, n = 30) in patients with MDD, and accelerated iTBS versus accelerated cTBS (2 RCTs, n = 57) in patients with MDD or BD. In patients with MDD, daily iTBS outperformed daily cTBS in terms of antidepressant efficacy, with comparable safety and tolerability profiles (1 RCT). Accelerated cTBS demonstrated superior anxiolytic (1 RCT) and anti-suicidal efficacy (1 RCT) compared to accelerated iTBS in MDD, with similar antidepressant efficacy, safety, and tolerability profiles for patients with MDD or BD (2 RCTs). Conclusion: Among the limited number of available studies, the efficacy and safety of daily or accelerated iTBS compared to daily or accelerated cTBS in patients with MDD or BD were uncertain. Future research with larger sample sizes and standardized assessments is essential to confirm these findings.
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.