Table 2.
Study | Diagnosis | Sample size (active/sham) | Location (stimulation) | Frequency (Hz) | Intensity (%MT) | No. of stimuli (pulses) | Duration (days) | Evaluation | Outcomes | Results |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Walther et al23 | Schizophrenia | 20/20 | Left IFG (iTBS) | 30 | 80 | 600 | 1 | Online | TULIA | No significant effect |
20/20 | Right IPL (cTBS) | 30 | 100 | 801 | 1 | Online | TULIA | Significant effects in social perception | ||
Wölwer et al24 | Schizophrenia | 18/14 | Left DLPFC | 10 | 110 | 1,000 | 10 | Within 12 h after stimulation | Pictures of facial affect | Significant effects in emotion recognition |
Abbreviations: rTMS, repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation; IFG, inferior frontal gyrus; iTBS, intermittent theta burst stimulation; TULIA, test of upper limb apraxia; IPL, inferior parietal lobe; cTBS, continuous theta burst stimulation; DLPFC, dorsolateral prefrontal cortex.
Sham stimulation was performed with a sham coil system without a magnetic field in Walther et al23 and Wölwer et al24 studies. Otherwise, these studies23,24 used the same parameters among active and sham groups. “Significant effects in social perception” meant that stimulation enhanced the ability to assess the accuracy of performance of hand gestures.23 “Significant effects in emotion recognition” meant that stimulation enhanced the ability to identify facial emotion based on photographs or videos.24