ReviewFrontiers in psychiatry2026
Innovations in repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation: a review of clinical evidence and patient-reported outcomes for ExoTMS.
Review 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is a non-invasive neuromodulation technique with demonstrated efficacy in the treatment of multiple psychiatric and neurological disorders. ExoTMS represents an evolution in TMS system design, developed to optimize focused brain stimulation while enhancing patient comfort and operational efficiency. By leveraging established neuroplastic mechanisms in a more patient-centered format, ExoTMS may represent a scalable advancement when compared to conventional TMS systems. This review examines the technological characteristics, safety profile, and therapeutic implications of ExoTMS, with particular attention to patient-reported outcomes, treatment comfort, and safety. Methods: Eight studies were included, comprising 182 active-treated participants who received stimulation at effective intensity levels. Treatment protocols consisted of 4 to 6 sessions, with follow-up assessments conducted at 1 month and, in studies reporting extended follow-up, at 3 months post-treatment. Data collected included mapping time for coil positioning and setup, incidence of adverse events, and patient-reported outcomes. Subjective measures assessed treatment satisfaction and perceived comfort using questionnaires. Results: Patients reported high satisfaction with ExoTMS treatment, with improvements observed immediately post-treatment, and further increases at follow-up. Improvements were noted across multiple domains, including overall well-being, mood, perceived stress, and mental energy. Treatment tolerability was high, with 93.3% of participants reporting the therapy as comfortable and associated with minimal to no pain. No serious adverse events were reported. Conclusion: ExoTMS appears to be a well-tolerated TMS-based intervention characterized by favorable treatment comfort, minimal pain, and the absence of serious adverse events. Patient-reported outcomes suggest improvements in well-being and self-regulatory domains that persist beyond the immediate treatment period. Compared with conventional TMS systems, ExoTMS may offer practical advantages, including reduced treatment burden and improved clinical workflow efficiency.
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.