Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42813094›Full record

ReviewBrain communications2026

Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation as adjunctive treatment in Parkinson's disease: are we missing opportunities? An umbrella and scoping review.

Marcelo D Mendonça, Gonçalo Cotovio, Raquel Barbosa, Jean-Pascal Lefaucheur, Joaquim J Ferreira, Albino J Oliveira-Maia

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Brain communications, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Marcelo D MendonçaChampalimaud Clinical Centre, Digital Neurotherapeutics Centre and Neuroscience of Disease Programme, Champalimaud Foundation, Lisboa 1400-038, Portugal.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3587-8553
Gonçalo CotovioChampalimaud Clinical Centre, Digital Neurotherapeutics Centre and Neuroscience of Disease Programme, Champalimaud Foundation, Lisboa 1400-038, Portugal.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1267-645X
Raquel BarbosaDepartment of Clinical Pharmacology and Neurosciences, Parkinson Expert Center, Centre d'Investigation Clinique CIC1436, NeuroToul COEN Center, Toulouse 31300, France.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3138-2975
Jean-Pascal LefaucheurUR4391, ENT Team, Faculty of Health, Paris-Est Creteil University, Créteil 94000, France.
Joaquim J FerreiraLaboratory of Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de Lisboa, Lisbon 1649-028, Portugal.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3950-5113
Albino J Oliveira-MaiaChampalimaud Clinical Centre, Digital Neurotherapeutics Centre and Neuroscience of Disease Programme, Champalimaud Foundation, Lisboa 1400-038, Portugal.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5071-3007

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite the availability of effective treatments, many symptoms of Parkinson's disease remain insufficiently addressed. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), a non-invasive neuromodulation technique, may help fill these therapeutic gaps, but its clinical role remains unclear. We conducted an umbrella review of systematic reviews and a scoping review of original studies on rTMS for Parkinson's disease, focusing on motor and non-motor symptoms. Review-level evidence and guideline statements support probable benefit of high-frequency rTMS targeting bilateral motor areas (particularly primary motor cortex) for improving motor symptoms. Low-frequency stimulation of premotor and cerebellar circuits has also shown signals for reducing levodopa-induced dyskinesias, although evidence is less definitive. For non-motor symptoms, high-frequency rTMS of the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) appears clearly beneficial for depression, with positive signals for cognitive symptoms, while right-DLPFC stimulation has shown preliminary signals on sleep disturbances. Across most domains, conclusions are limited by small sample sizes, short follow-up periods, heterogeneous stimulation protocols, inconsistent outcome measures and variable methodological quality of both trials and reviews. Evidence therefore remains insufficient to support broad clinical implementation across many symptom domains. Future research should adopt a circuit-based, symptom-specific approach, aligning stimulation targets with the neural substrates of each symptom. This requires clear inclusion criteria, well-characterized patient subgroups and standardized outcome measures across studies. The current literature suggests that rTMS may have therapeutic potential as part of multidisciplinary Parkinson's disease care, but adequately powered and rigorous trials are needed to determine its clinical utility and define where it may meaningfully address persistent therapeutic gaps.

Indexed as

motorParkinson’s diseaserehabilitationrTMS

Identifiers

PMID42813094
PMCPMC13621913

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.