Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24895588›Full record

Trial reportBioMed research international2014

The ineffective role of cathodal tDCS in enhancing the functional motor outcomes in early phase of stroke rehabilitation: an experimental trial.

Augusto Fusco, Federica Assenza, Marco Iosa, Simona Izzo, Riccardo Altavilla, Stefano Paolucci, Fabrizio Vernieri

Open access · hybridAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in BioMed research international, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers, 14 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
38citing papers in PubMed, 14 pooled it
4.0field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

38 citing papers in PubMed, 14 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 75 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Transcranial direct current stimulation for improving ambulation after stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis.International journal of rehabilitation research. Internationale Zeitschrift fur Rehabilitationsforschung. Revue internationale de recherches de readaptation · 2020
    Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Pooled it
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Augusto FuscoClinical Laboratory of Experimental Neurorehabilitation, IRCCS Fondazione Santa Lucia, Via Ardeatina 306, 00179 Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-8528-7834
Federica AssenzaDepartment of Neurology, Campus Bio-Medico University, Via Álvaro del Portillo 200, 00128 Rome, Italy.
Marco IosaClinical Laboratory of Experimental Neurorehabilitation, IRCCS Fondazione Santa Lucia, Via Ardeatina 306, 00179 Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-2434-3887
Simona IzzoClinical Laboratory of Experimental Neurorehabilitation, IRCCS Fondazione Santa Lucia, Via Ardeatina 306, 00179 Rome, Italy.
Riccardo AltavillaDepartment of Neurology, Campus Bio-Medico University, Via Álvaro del Portillo 200, 00128 Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-7637-9980
Stefano PaolucciClinical Laboratory of Experimental Neurorehabilitation, IRCCS Fondazione Santa Lucia, Via Ardeatina 306, 00179 Rome, Italy.
Fabrizio VernieriDepartment of Neurology, Campus Bio-Medico University, Via Álvaro del Portillo 200, 00128 Rome, Italy.
Fondazione Santa Lucia · ITUniversità Campus Bio-Medico · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a noninvasive technique that could improve the rehabilitation outcomes in stroke, eliciting neuroplastic mechanisms. At the same time conflicting results have been reported in subacute phase of stroke, when neuroplasticity is crucial. The aim of this double-blind, randomized, and sham-controlled study was to determine whether a treatment with cathodal tDCS before the rehabilitative training might augment the final outcomes (upper limb function, hand dexterity and manual force, locomotion, and activities of daily living) in respect of a traditional rehabilitation for a sample of patients affected by ischemic stroke in the subacute phase. An experimental group (cathodal tDCS plus rehabilitation) and a control group (sham tDCS plus rehabilitation) were assessed at the beginning of the protocol, after 10 days of stimulation, after 30 days from ending of stimulation, and at the end of inpatient rehabilitation. Both groups showed significant improvements for all the assessed domains during the rehabilitation, except for the manual force, while no significant differences were demonstrated between groups. These results seem to indicate that the cathodal tDCS, provided in an early phase of stroke, does not lead to a functional improvement. To depict a more comprehensive scenario, further studies are needed.

Indexed as

Stroke RehabilitationTreatment OutcomeActivities of Daily LivingAdultAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedMotor CortexStrokeTranscranial Direct Current Stimulation

Identifiers

PMID24895588
PMCPMC4026962
OpenAlexW2157303434

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.