Cited by 9Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation StudiesDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchTraumatic Brain Injury Research

The effect of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation on immediate and long-term cognitive functions in Alzheimer’s dementia and mild cognitive impairment: a meta-analysis

Open access
Wang, Bojun, Wang, Ya, Yang, Fenglei, Han, Fang, Li, Kuncheng, Sun, Kai, Liang, Peipeng·2025·Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Alzheimer's dementia (AD) and mild cognitive impairment (MCI) are characterized by progressive cognitive decline. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), a non-invasive brain stimulation technology, has been widely used to improve cognition in AD and MCI. However, the impact of rTMS on immediate and long-term cognitive functions in AD and MCI, as well as the optimal stimulating parameters, need further clarification. METHOD: Thirty-one randomized controlled trials were included to examine the effects of rTMS on immediate cognition (post-treatment cognition), while nine trials were specifically used to assess its impact on long-term cognition (follow-up cognition). All participants were tested on at least one of the neuropsychological scales of the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and Alzheimer's disease Assessment Scale-Cognitive Section (ADAS-Cog) to evaluate global cognitive outcomes of rTMS. The study followed the guidelines for meta-analysis of intervention studies and assessed the risk of bias of the included studies. Moderator analysis was used to examine factors that might affect treatment effect. Sensitivity analysis was used to evaluate stability of results. Meta-regression analysis was used to assess the interpretability of heterogeneity. Begg's and Egger's test and funnel plot were applied to assess publication bias. RESULTS: The results demonstrated that rTMS significantly improved immediate cognition (SMD = 0.93, 95% CI = 0.64 to 1.22, p < 0.001) and long-term cognition (SMD = 0.42, 95% CI = 0.13 to 0.70, p = 0.004) across all patients (including AD and MCI). Moderator analysis revealed that targeting dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC), using intensities of 80% or less of the motor threshold, total time of 800 min or more and stimulation sessions greater than 20 significantly enhanced immediate cognitive performance than their counterparts. In contrast, stimulation frequency, duration/session and patient type showed no significant impact on immediate cognition. For long-term cognition, differences in stimulation protocols had no influence on treatment effect for all patients. CONCLUSION: rTMS had a positive effect on immediate and long-term cognition in AD and MCI, stimulation region, intensity, total time and number of sessions significantly improve immediate cognition. These findings suggest that rTMS has potential as a promising adjunctive treatment for AD and MCI.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/s12984-025-01777-8

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Authors
Wang, B., Wang, Y., Yang, F., Han, F., Li, K., Sun, K., & Liang, P.
Affiliations
  • Capital Medical University (CN)
  • Capital Normal University (CN)
  • Dalian University (CN)
  • Shantou University Medical College (CN)
Corresponding author
  • Sun, Kai
  • Liang, Peipeng
Venue
Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation
Published
2025-12-15
Volume
22
Issue
1
Pages
262-262
ISSN
1743-0003 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4417328562
Cited by
9
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 9
FWCI
0.81
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
Key Project of Medical and health technology of Longgang District, Shenzhen (LGKCYLWS2022034)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Traumatic Brain Injury Research
Keywords
repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation, Alzheimer's dementia, mild cognitive impairment, cognitive function, long-term cognitive outcomes, dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, stimulation parameters, motor threshold, adjunctive therapy, cognitive decline, stimulation frequency, stimulation duration, stimulation intensity, publication bias, risk of bias, neuropsychological assessment, Mini-Mental State Examination, Montreal Cognitive Assessment
MeSH terms
Aged, Alzheimer Disease, Cognition, Humans, Neuropsychological Tests, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Treatment Outcome, Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation, Cognitive Dysfunction

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review