Skip to main content

Table 4 Summary of meta-regression and subgroup analysis results of rTMS on balance ability in stroke patients

From: Therapeutic efficacy of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation on gait and limb balance function in patients with lower limb dysfunction post-cerebral infarction: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Covariate

Shared beta

Heterogeneity

Number of studies

SMD

 

(mean and 95% CI), P value

(I2)

 

(95% CI)

None

-

69.00%

8

0.72 (0.35, 1.09)a

Type

−0.08 (−0.60, 0.44), 0.721

-

-

-

 High rTMS

-

46.30%

3

0.83 (0.34, 1.33)aa

 Low rMTS

-

76.80%

3

0.68 (−0.06, 1.42)

 iTBS

-

62.70%

3

0.63 (−0.10, 1.36)

Stimulation site

−0.04 (−0.50, 0.42), 0.849

-

-

-

 M1, Affected

-

84.50%

2

0.66 (−0.37, 1.70)

 M1, Unaffected

-

70.50%

3

0.75 (0.11, 1.39)a

 M1, Bilateral

-

56.30%

3

0.69 (0.02, 1.37)a

 LDPC

-

-

1

0.59 (−0.36, 1.53)

Pulses/session

0.75 (0.06, 1.56), 0.044b

-

-

-

 < 1000

-

0.00%

2

0.18 (−0.34, 0.70)

 1000 to 1500

-

42.00%

6

0.92 (0.63, 1.21)aa

 ≥ 1500

-

-

-

-

Total sessions

0.08 (0.03, 0.12), 0.004b

-

-

-

 5

-

0.00%

2

0.31 (−0.24, 0.85)

 6 to 10

-

-

-

-

 ≥ 10

-

54.10%

6

0.85 (0.53, 1.18)aa

Resting motor threshold (%)

−0.01 (−0.08, 0.05), 0.656

-

-

-

 80–100

-

69.00%

8

0.72 (0.35, 1.09)a

 > 100

-

-

-

-

  1. M1 Motor cortex, SMD Standardized mean difference, CI Confidence interval, LDPC Left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex projection area, asignificant therapeutic effect, a large effect size, b Potential factors significantly affect the results