Unlocking the Potential of Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation in Alzheimer’s Disease: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials to Optimize Intervention Strategies
Open accessAbstract
Background: Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is an advanced and noninvasive technology that uses pulse stimulation to treat cognitive impairment. However, its specific effects have always been mixed with those of cognitive training, and the optimal parameter for Alzheimer’s disease (AD) intervention is still ambiguous. Objective: This study aimed to summarize the therapeutic effects of pure rTMS on AD, excluding the influence of cognitive training, and to develop a preliminary rTMS treatment plan. Methods: Between 1 January 2010 and 28 February 2023, we screened randomized controlled clinical trials from five databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane, and ClinicalTrials. gov). We conducted a meta-analysis and systematic review of treatment outcomes and rTMS treatment parameters. Result: A total of 4,606 articles were retrieved. After applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 16 articles, comprising 655 participants (308 males and 337 females), were included in the final analysis. The findings revealed that rTMS significantly enhances both global cognitive ability ( p = 0.0002, SMD = 0.43, 95% CI = 0.20–0.66) and memory ( p = 0.009, SMD = 0.37, 95% CI = 0.09–0.65). Based on follow-up periods of at least 6 weeks, the following stimulation protocols have demonstrated efficacy for AD: stimulation sites (single or multiple targets), frequency (20 Hz), stimulation time (1–2 s), interval (20–30 s), single pulses (≤2500), total pulses (>20000), duration (≥3 weeks), and sessions (≥20). Conclusions: This study suggests that rTMS may be an effective treatment option for patients with AD, and its potential therapeutic capabilities should be further developed in the future.
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials
Sterne, J. A. C., Savović, J., Page, M. J., Elbers, R. G., Blencowe, N. S., Boutron, I., Cates, C. J., Cheng, H.-Y., Corbett, M. S., Eldridge, S. M., et al. (2019) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.l4898 · Cited by 33,583 · see citing works
Alzheimer Disease: An Update on Pathobiology and Treatment Strategies
Long, J. M., & Holtzman, D. M. (2019) · Cell · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2019.09.001 · Cited by 3,204 · see citing works
Transcranial magnetic stimulation and the human brain
Hallett, M. (2000) · Nature · doi:10.1038/35018000 · Cited by 1,603 · cited 1× · see citing works
“A pulsed magnetic field can be employed to generate an electric current in the brain, which can temporarily stimulate or inhibit specific areas[11].”
BackgroundGlobal estimates on the number of persons across the Alzheimer's disease continuum
Gustavsson, A., Norton, N., Fast, T., Frölich, L., Georges, J., Holzapfel, D., Kirabali, T., Krolak‐Salmon, P., Rossini, P. M., Ferretti, M. T., et al. (2023) · Alzheimer's & Dementia · doi:10.1002/alz.12694 · Cited by 895 · see citing works
Chou, Y.-H., Ton That, V., & Sundman, M. (2020) · Neurobiology of Aging · doi:10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2019.08.020 · Cited by 319 · see citing works
Alzheimer Disease and Mortality: A 15-Year Epidemiological Study
Ganguli, M., Dodge, H. H., Shen, C., Pandav, R. S., & DeKosky, S. T. (2005) · Archives of Neurology · doi:10.1001/archneur.62.5.779 · Cited by 297 · see citing works
Iimori, T., Nakajima, S., Miyazaki, T., Tarumi, R., Ogyu, K., Wada, M., Tsugawa, S., Masuda, F., Daskalakis, Z. J., Blumberger, D. M., et al. (2019) · Progress in Neuro-Psychopharmacology and Biological Psychiatry · doi:10.1016/j.pnpbp.2018.06.014 · Cited by 94 · see citing works
Farina, E., Mantovani, F., Fioravanti, R., Pignatti, R., Chiavari, L., Imbornone, E., Olivotto, F., Alberoni, M., Mariani, C., & Nemni, R. (2006) · Aging & Mental Health · doi:10.1080/13607860500409492 · Cited by 81 · see citing works
Cheng, C. P. W., Wong, C. S. M., Lee, K. K., Chan, A. P. K., Yeung, J. W. F., & Chan, W. C. (2018) · International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry · doi:10.1002/gps.4726 · Cited by 63 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
- Authors
- Li, S., Lan, X., Liu, Y., Zhou, J., Pei, Z., Su, X., & Guo, Y.
- Affiliations
- Shenzhen Bay Laboratory (CN)
- Harvard University (US)
- Jinan University (CN)
- Corresponding author
- Guo, Yi
- Venue
- Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2024-02-28
- Volume
- 98
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 481-503
- ISSN
- 1387-2877 (ISSN-L)
- 1875-8908
- PMC
- PMC10977421
- OpenAlex
- W4392388226
- Cited by
- 24
- References
- 9
- Citations by year
- 2026: 11 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 2
- FWCI
- 1.23
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Journal of Alzheimer s Disease (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Science, Technology and Innovation Commission of Shenzhen Municipality (SGDX20210823103805042)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Alzheimer's disease research and treatments
- Keywords
- repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation, Alzheimer's disease
- MeSH terms
- Alzheimer Disease, Humans, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Treatment Outcome, 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