Repetitive peripheral magnetic stimulation for impairment and disability in people after stroke

Evaluating Large Language Models on Medical Evidence Summarization

“…Finally, Attribute Errors refer to any errors on non-key elements in the review question (i.e., Patient/ Problem, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcome) and may arise in summaries under three circumstances: (a) Fabricated Attribute: This error occurs when a summary incorporates an attribute for a specific symptom or outcome that is not referenced in the source document. For example, a review [18] draws conclusions about a population with intracranial artery stenosis (ICAS), but the summary states the population with recent symptomatic severe ICAS, where "recent" and "severe" cannot be inferred from the document and would impact one's interpretation of the review; (b) Omitted Attribute: This error occurs when a summary neglects an attribute for a specific symptom or outcome, such as neglecting to specify the subtype of dementia discussed in the review, leading to overgeneralization of the conclusion [17]; and (c) Distorted Attribute: This error occurs when the specified attribute is incorrect, like stating four trials are included in the study while the source document indicates that only two trials are included [20].…”

“…However, not all summaries with these errors would bring medical harm. For example, although the summary makes a significant error by misspecifying the number of trials in a study [20], our domain experts do not think this could bring medical harm.…”

Effects of repetitive peripheral magnetic stimulation for the upper limb after stroke: Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

“…Although the clinical effects of rPMS have been explored in several randomized controlled trials (RCTs), a meta-analysis of its pooled effectiveness that specifically focused on the upper limb is lacking [ [14] , [15] , [16] , [17] , [18] ]. The Cochrane reviews by Sakai and colleagues preliminarily found that rPMS could significantly improve ADL and functional ability but not upper limb motor function after stroke [ 19 , 20 ]. However, the conclusion concerning rPMS efficacy for stroke rehabilitation was limited by evidence because the number of included trials was insufficient.…”

Repetitive peripheral magnetic stimulation combined with transcranial magnetic stimulation in rehabilitation of upper extremity hemiparesis following stroke: a pilot study

“…Recovery of the paretic extremity is affected by bilateral imbalance in the excitability of the cerebral hemispheres after stroke ( 5 , 6 ). Numerous preliminary studies have identified the benefits of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) in motor recovery related to modulated cortical reorganization and induced neural plasticity ( 7 – 10 ). The lesioned hemisphere’s primary motor cortex (M1) is intensely involved in cortical reorganization of the motor functional network during recovery after stroke ( 11 , 12 ).…”

“…However, PAS did not alter the excitability of spinal motor neurones nor the motor-evoked potential (MEP) observed following brainstem stimulation ( 19 ). Enhanced M1 excitability has been observed when peripheral stimulation preferentially activates proprioceptive afferents ( 7 , 20 ). In previous studies, electrical stimulation was used to activate the excitability of peripheral nerves and muscles; however, high-intensity electrical stimulation can be perceived as uncomfortable ( 13 , 21 ).…”