I was denied entry into some rTMS research because my damage to the motor cortex was so bad that nothing in rTMS would have worked. So cherry picking research subjects to make the research look good. I wouldn't trust the results here to give a valid response since I bet more disabled persons were not selected.
Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation in Stroke Rehabilitation: A Bibliometric Review
Published: February 23, 2025
DOI:
10.7759/cureus.79509
Peer-Reviewed
Cite this article as: Juhi A, Gayen R K, Sharma S, et al. (February 23, 2025) Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation in Stroke Rehabilitation: A Bibliometric Review. Cureus 17(2): e79509. doi:10.7759/cureus.79509
Stroke is a major cause of disability globally, with rehabilitation playing a crucial role in restoring lost functions. Despite advancements, many stroke survivors face persistent deficits, prompting the need for innovative approaches such as repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS). This non-invasive technique promotes neural plasticity and recovery by modulating cortical excitability, garnering significant research interest. This bibliometric analysis of rTMS research in stroke rehabilitation was conducted to find publication trends and influential studies. Data were collected from the Web of Science (WOS) with search strings as follows: TI = ((repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation) OR rTMS) AND TI = ((stroke) OR stroke rehabilitation). The studies till the 31st of December 2024 were included. No language or other filters were applied. A total of 556 studies were identified. While analyzing the data, there may be a higher or lower count of the total number of studies due to the overlap of categories. For example, a study may have authors from different countries, making the total number of publications according to countries higher than 556. There was a growing interest in rTMS in the context of stroke rehabilitation, with a substantial increase in publications in 2022, 2023, and 2024. Among the studies, the majority of the studies were research articles (62.42%), followed by meeting abstracts (18.41%). The studies (n = 983) were in the fields of clinical neurology (27.47%) and neuroscience (27.37%), followed by rehabilitation (8.55%). When studies (n = 645) were categorized according to countries, The People's Republic of China had the majority of the studies (29.92%), followed by South Korea (11.01%), the USA (10.85%), and Japan (9.61%). Elsevier (15.83%) leads in publishing the articles, followed by Frontiers Media (13.49%). The top citation was for the article titled "Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation of Contralesional Primary Motor Cortex Improves Hand Function After Stroke" with 521 citations and was published in the journal Stroke. These findings provide valuable insights into research trends, influential studies, and global collaboration, emphasizing the potential of rTMS in advancing stroke recovery. More studies are needed from diverse geographical regions with possible international collaboration.
Introduction & Background
Stroke is a leading cause of disability worldwide, affecting millions of individuals annually and imposing a significant socioeconomic burden on healthcare systems. Currently, 110 million people worldwide suffer from stroke, with over 60% of those individuals being under 70 years of age [1]. Rehabilitation is a cornerstone of stroke recovery, aiming to restore motor, cognitive, and sensory functions to improve the patient's quality of life [2]. Despite advancements in conventional rehabilitation methods, many stroke survivors experience persistent deficits, highlighting the need for innovative approaches [3].
Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), a non-invasive neuromodulation technique, has emerged as a promising adjunct in stroke rehabilitation [4]. By delivering magnetic pulses to targeted brain regions, rTMS can modulate cortical excitability and promote neural plasticity, facilitating recovery of motor and cognitive functions [5]. Over the past two decades, a growing body of research has investigated the therapeutic potential of rTMS in post-stroke rehabilitation, examining its efficacy, optimal protocols, and underlying mechanisms. The growing interest in rTMS for stroke rehabilitation has resulted in a wealth of published literature, including clinical trials, narrative reviews, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses, all exploring its efficacy, mechanisms, and optimal protocols [6].
A bibliometric analysis serves as a powerful tool to evaluate the scientific landscape, identify research trends, and highlight influential studies, authors, and institutions [7]. By systematically analyzing the publication patterns and citation dynamics, such a review can provide a broader perspective on the evolution of rTMS research in stroke rehabilitation. The major limitation of bibliometric analysis is that it focuses on quantitative aspects such as publication counts, citations, and impact factors, which may not fully capture research quality, clinical relevance, or actual scientific contributions. Additionally, it is influenced by database coverage. For example, if a journal is not indexed in Medline, PubMed Central, or Bookshelf and reviewers use only PubMed search in their analysis, they may miss the articles published in that journal.
A previous study by Li et al. reported trends up to 2023 [6], using a search across all fields and including transcranial magnetic stimulation (searched as “TMS”). In the present study, we focused specifically on rTMS in stroke rehabilitation up to 2024, limiting the search to titles. This approach was chosen to ensure that the studies or articles addressing the applicability of rTMS in stroke rehabilitation included these key terms in their titles. If all fields are chosen, then any article having the terms even in the discussion of any research paper may appear in the search result, which is not in the scope of this bibliometric analysis.
More at link.
No comments:
Post a Comment