Distinctive neurocognitive effects of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation and electroconvulsive therapy in major depression
Open accessAbstract
Background: Studies have compared electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) and repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) with regard to clinical efficacy in the treatment of depression, but no study has yet addressed the differential impact on cognition. Aims: To compare the neurocognitive effects of unilateral ECT and rTMS. Method: Thirty patients with treatment-refractory non-psychotic major depression received an average of ten treatments with either unilateral ECT or left prefrontal rTMS and were assessed for objective and subjective cognitive impairments before and about a week after treatment. Results: Treatment response was comparable (46% of the ECT group and 44% of the rTMS group showed a reduction of 50% or more in Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression scores). In patients treated with rTMS, cognitive performance remained constant or improved and memory complaints alleviated, whereas in the ECT group memory recall deficits emerged and memory complaints remained. Conclusions: In contrastto unilateral ECT, rTMS has no adverse memory effects.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
While the neurocognitive effects of standard rTMS have been well-studied, a dearth of evidence exists related to neurocognition in TBS for TRD.
“While the neurocognitive effects of standard rTMS have been wellstudied (Gregory et al., 2022;Schulze-Rauschenbach et al., 2005;Yildiz et al., 2023), a dearth of evidence exists related to neurocognition in TBS for TRD.”
From Neurocognitive effects of theta burst stimulation for treatment-resistant depression in adults: A systematic review and recommendations for future research (2025) · cites this paper as Schulze-Rauschenbach et al., 2005
The Neuropsychological effects section reports cognitive testing after rTMS, so this paper supports the claim that standard rTMS has been studied for neurocognitive effects. But the Background says no prior study had addressed its differential cognitive impact versus ECT, and the Limitations call this study's findings preliminary; the paper does not establish that those effects were already well studied. The citation is attached to the rTMS clause, not the claim about a lack of TBS evidence. (LLM, conf=0.84)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredIn contrast to electroconvulsive therapy, rTMS is recognized for its cognitive safety and potential to improve certain cognitive functions in treatment-resistant depression.
“In contrast to electroconvulsive therapy (ECT), rTMS is recognized for its cognitive safety 11 and potential to improve certain cognitive functions in TRD.”
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 38 · Cited by 122
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- e-mail: michael.wagner e-mail: michael.wagner@ @ukb.uni-bonn.de ukb.uni-bonn.de (First received 13 April 2004, final revision 23 September 2004, accepted 23 September 2004) (First received 13 April 2004, final revision 23 September 2004, accepted 23 September 2004) https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.186.5.410 Published online by Cambridge University Press
- Authors
- Schulze-Rauschenbach, S. C., Harms, U., Schlaepfer, T. E., Maier, W., Falkai, P., & Wagner, M.
- Affiliations
- University of Bonn (DE)
- Corresponding author
- Wagner, Michael
- Venue
- British Journal of Psychiatry
- Publisher
- Royal College of Psychiatrists
- Published
- 2005-05
- Volume
- 186
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 410-416
- ISSN
- 0007-1250 (ISSN-L)
- 1472-1465
- OpenAlex
- W2132039357
- Cited by
- 122
- References
- 38
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 6
- FWCI
- 5.64
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- The British Journal of Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Electroconvulsive Therapy Studies
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Treatment of Major Depression
- Keywords
- repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation, electroconvulsive therapy, major depressive disorder, treatment-resistant depression, neurocognitive effects, memory impairment, cognitive side effects, treatment response
- MeSH terms
- Analysis of Variance, Major Depressive Disorder, Depressive Disorder, Major, Electroconvulsive Therapy, Electric Stimulation Therapy, Female, Humans, Male, Memory Disorders, Middle Aged, Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation
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
