SynthesisBMC neurology2026
Role of non-invasive brain stimulation with repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in improving fine motor performance of post-stroke patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC neurology, 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionNon-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) is one of the considered interventions to improve fine motor skills in stroke patients. However, there could be various frequencies and durations performed in each trial involving Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation that might affect the patient’s outcome.
objectiveThis research was to investigate the potential enhancement of fine motor performance in stroke patients through the application of non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) techniques.
methodsThe literature search was carried out through 3 electronic databases, namely PubMed, Cochrane, and ScienceDirect which include articles published up to 31 December 2024, and published in English. Before selecting the studies, the study duplication was detected by Zotero Reference Manager® and then removed. The related studies examined and selected with rayyan.ai® website using a “blind-on” mode to ensure eligibility.
resultsTwenty-two studies comparing Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation vs. controls with the frequencies of outcomes used were Fugl-Meyer Assessment (68.4%), and Action Research Arm Test (15.7%) were reviewed with thirteen of them included in meta-analysis. All articles were randomized controlled trials. The effect size in repeated transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) stroke comparisons was 2.58 (95% CI, 0.18–4.97; P = 0.04; Tau2, 19.05; I2, 99%; Q, 1367.54; P < 0.00001), whereas the Electrical Stimulation for theta burst stimulation (TBS) comparisons was 1.25 (95% CI, 0.01–2.49; P = 0.05; Tau2, 0.57; I2, 54%; Q, 4.34; P = 0.11). Conclusion: Non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) with rTMS is one of the considered interventions to improve fine motor skills in stroke patients. Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation has a better significance than the conventional therapy methods.
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.