Table 27:

Characteristics of Included Quantitative Studies on Patients’ and Providers’ Preferences for rTMS

Author, Year Country	Study Design	Study Methods	Participants
Walter et al, 2001175 Australia (Tasmania)	Questionnaire	60-item survey constructed by authors. Fifty-five items offered a set choice of responses and 5 items were open-ended. Several items were adapted from an instrument that Walter et al developed for ECT studies. The survey covered demographic features (e.g., age, sex, relationship status, occupation), experience with rTMS (e.g., fears, provision of information, perceived effectiveness, side effects, comparisons with other treatments), knowledge (e.g., about the nature and technical aspects of rTMS) and attitudes (e.g., whether rTMS is humane or cruel and whether recipients would recommend it to others)	All participants received rTMS. Patients all had a DSM-IV major depressive episode that had failed to respond to adequate trials of medication. All patients had received antidepressants; some had also been treated with antipsychotics, anxiolytics, and mood stabilizers
AlHadi et al, 2017176 Saudi Arabia	Questionnaire	Developed a new questionnaire based on other studies that have measured knowledge of and attitudes toward ECT. The questionnaire's 3 sections cover demographic information, knowledge, and attitudes. The knowledge section had 21 items that evaluated aspects of rTMS knowledge. These items had 3 response options: “yes,” “no,” and “I don't know.” The attitude section had 13 items, including both positive and negative attitude statements. These items used a 5-point Likert scale with options of “strongly agree,” “agree,” “neutral,” “disagree,” and “strongly disagree”	Questionnaire was e-mailed to approximately 300 psychiatrists, and those who responded were included in the study (convenience sampling), resulting in a response rate of 33%. The e-mail list was obtained from several sources, primarily the Saudi Psychiatric Association, the Saudi Commission for Health Specialties, and personal communication. Junior residents are first− and second-year residents in the psychiatry training program; senior residents are third− and fourth-year residents in the program
Bourla et al, 2020177 France	Questionnaire	All questions were designed during 3 focus groups that included psychiatrists and sociologists and were cross-validated by a sample of psychiatrists working at a hospital in Paris. Questions were inspired by previous studies. Questionnaire had 3 sections: epidemiological data, acceptability of rTMS and influencing factors (25 items), and a blank field for qualitative data. For each variable, participants responded to the questions on a Likert-type scale ranging from 1 to 6 (or ranging from “absolutely not” to “I agree totally”). For some questions (items 2–5) a more specific response was allowed (“yes,” “no,” “I don't know,” or “more sustainable,” “less,” “same,” etc.). For item 1, we asked practitioners to consider the most useful treatment option (ECT, rTMS, tDCS, antidepressants, or psychotherapy) in various situations (mild, moderate, severe, etc.). An “overall acceptability” score was implemented using four specific variables highly representative of each domain (items 1, 8, 9, 11) allowing assignment of respondents to three groups: low, moderate, or high acceptability	Study focused on a population of psychiatrists working in France. They ranged from residents to senior psychiatrists who worked in psychiatric facilities, general or university hospitals, or private practice. 475 psychiatrists participated in the study

Abbreviations: ECT, electroconvulsive therapy; DSM-IV, Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders; rTMS, repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation; tDCS, transcranial direct-current stimulation; TMS, transcranial magnetic stimulation.