An Update of a Meta-Analysis on the Clinical Outcomes of Deep Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (DTMS) in Major Depressive Disorder (MDD)

Gellersen, Helena M.; Kedzior, Karina Karolina

doi:10.1027/2151-2604/a000320

Cited by 8 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 46 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Another promising method—known as deep TMS (dTMS)—is a noninvasive technique allowing for stimulation of deeper cortical areas and presumably deeper neural networks [ 38 , 39 ]. Since the approval of dTMS in 2013 by the US Food and Drug Administration for major depressive disorder [ 40 ], this method of intervention has gained popularity for the treatment of diverse psychiatric disorders.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Clinical Efficacy of Deep Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation in Psychiatric and Cognitive Disorders: Protocol for a Systematic Review

Passa¹,

Dabir²,

Fein³

et al. 2023

JMIR Res Protoc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is a widely used noninvasive brain stimulation technique for psychiatric and cognitive disorders. In recent years, deep TMS (dTMS) has shown promise as an enhanced form of TMS able to stimulate deeper brain structures and target broader networks. Various magnetic Hesed-coil (H-coil) designs—a novel feature of dTMS—have been used to stimulate brain regions implicated in the pathophysiology of specific psychiatric and cognitive disorders, thereby producing therapeutic effects. Given the novelty of dTMS in psychiatry, little is known about the clinical efficacy of dTMS across psychiatric and cognitive disorders—that is, whether dTMS performs superiorly to sham or control. Objective In this paper, we outline a protocol for a systematic review investigating the clinical efficacy of dTMS. The primary objective is to conduct a systematic review of the literature on dTMS for psychiatric and cognitive disorders and, if feasible, a meta-analysis to compare the efficacy of active dTMS versus sham/control for psychiatric disorders. Dementia and related cognitive disorders will also be examined. A secondary objective will be to examine subgroup differences (by age, sex, H-coil design, and dTMS parameters [ie, pulses per session, percentage of motor threshold, etc]) to evaluate whether dTMS differentially influences clinical outcomes based on these factors. Methods A comprehensive search of the APA PsycINFO, Embase, MEDLINE, and PubMed databases will be conducted using keywords such as “H-coil” and “dTMS.” Two authors (AD and MD) will be responsible for screening relevant articles, assessing article eligibility (according to predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria), and data extraction. All included articles will undergo a quality and risk of bias assessment. Data from included articles will be summarized qualitatively in a systematic review. If a sufficient number of equivalent studies are available, a meta-analysis will be performed to (1) determine the effect of active versus sham dTMS (or another control arm) across psychiatric and cognitive disorders, and (2) examine subgroup effects of clinical outcomes. Results The preliminary search rendered a total of 1134 articles from the APA PsycINFO, Embase, and MEDLINE databases. After full-text screening, 21 eligible articles remained. One additional article was identified from the references section of an existing systematic review. In total, 22 eligible articles were included. Data extraction and quality of assessment procedures are ongoing. Conclusions We will outline the evidence relating to the clinical efficacy of dTMS in various psychiatric and cognitive disorders. The results of the prospective systematic review will provide clinicians with valuable insight into the clinical (ie, participant age, sex, psychiatric or cognitive disorder, etc) and methodological factors (ie, H-coil design, dTMS parameters, etc) which may contribute to dTMS efficacy, and thereby may assist clinicians in their decision to prescribe dTMS for specific psychiatric and cognitive disorders. Trial Registration PROSPERO CRD42022360066; https://tinyurl.com/5ev6byrn International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID) DERR1-10.2196/45213

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Since the approval of dTMS in 2013 by the US Food and Drug Administration for major depressive disorder [40], this method of intervention has gained popularity for the treatment of diverse psychiatric disorders.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical Efficacy of Deep Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation in Psychiatric and Cognitive Disorders: Protocol for a Systematic Review

Passa¹,

Dabir²,

Fein³

et al. 2023

JMIR Res Protoc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Whereas replications and extensions of previous meta-analyses were not represented in the first issue, two articles of the current issue fall in this category (i.e., Gellersen & Kedzior, 2018; Steiger & Kühberger, 2018). The contribution by Helena Gellersen and Karina Karolina Kedzior (2018) entitled “An update of a meta-analysis on the clinical outcomes of deep transcranial magnetic stimulation (DTMS) in major depressive disorder (MDD)” aims at replicating and extending previous meta-analytic findings on DTMS effectiveness in depression. Major depressive disorder is the most widespread mental illness and for a significant number of patients, antidepressant medication is ineffective.…”

mentioning

confidence: 97%

“…Concerning the third and fourth category of papers we invited, the present Hotspots issue is somewhat complementary to the first one. Whereas replications and extensions of previous meta-analyses were not represented in the first issue, two articles of the current issue fall in this category (i.e., Gellersen & Kedzior, 2018;Steiger & Kühberger, 2018). The contribution by Helena Gellersen and Karina Karolina Kedzior (2018) entitled "An update of a metaanalysis on the clinical outcomes of deep transcranial magnetic stimulation (DTMS) in major depressive disorder (MDD)" aims at replicating and extending previous metaanalytic findings on DTMS effectiveness in depression.…”

mentioning

confidence: 98%

Hotspots in Psychology – 2018 Edition

Bošnjak

Erdfelder

2018

Zeitschrift für Psychologie

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This is the second "Hotspots in Psychology" issue of the Zeitschrift für Psychologie. The format is devoted to systematic reviews and meta-analyses in research-active (i.e., hotspot) fields that have generated a considerable number of primary studies. The common denominator is the research synthesis nature of the articles included, not a specific psychological topic or theme that all articles have to address.Resembling the first Hotspots issue (Erdfelder & Bosnjak, 2016), the call for papers for this second Hotspots in Psychology issue sought to attract contributions related to at least one of the following four topics: (1) Systematic reviews and meta-analyses on topics currently being debated in any subfield of psychology; (2) Systematic reviews and meta-analyses contributing to the recent discussion about replicability, transparency, and research integrity in psychology; (3) Meta-analytic replications and extensions of previously published syntheses, for example, by applying more recent approaches and/or by including more recent primary studies, and (4) Methodological advances in research synthesis methods relevant for any subfield of psychology.The papers that were accepted for publication do almost all relate to these areas. An exception is the first contribution in this issue, authored by André Bittermann and Andreas Fischer (2018) and entitled "How to identify hot topics in psychology using topic modeling." We editors consider Bitterman and Fischer's approach ground-breaking for identifying hotspot topics. The authors apply a textmining technique called latent Dirichlet allocation to identify research topics of particular significance over time using a bibliographic database corpus covering publications that appeared between the years 1980 and 2016. The authors provide evidence for the superiority of the text mining approach in comparison to a more traditional content classification system and identify five psychological topics with increasing numbers of publications in recent years. These are: Neuropsychology, online therapy, crosscultural research, traumatization, and visual attention.

show abstract

PROTOCOL: Treatment for depressive disorder among adults: An evidence and gap map of systematic reviews

Guo

White

et al. 2023

Campbell Systematic Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

An Update of a Meta-Analysis on the Clinical Outcomes of Deep Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (DTMS) in Major Depressive Disorder (MDD)

Cited by 8 publications

References 46 publications

Clinical Efficacy of Deep Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation in Psychiatric and Cognitive Disorders: Protocol for a Systematic Review

Clinical Efficacy of Deep Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation in Psychiatric and Cognitive Disorders: Protocol for a Systematic Review

Hotspots in Psychology – 2018 Edition

PROTOCOL: Treatment for depressive disorder among adults: An evidence and gap map of systematic reviews

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About