Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24907311›Full record

ReviewThe Journal of physiology2014

Transcranial cerebellar direct current stimulation and transcutaneous spinal cord direct current stimulation as innovative tools for neuroscientists.

Alberto Priori, Matteo Ciocca, Marta Parazzini, Maurizio Vergari, Roberta Ferrucci

2 registry-linked trialsAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in The Journal of physiology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 76 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
76citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT02817880 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2016, after this paper: background citation

Comparison of the Analgesic Effect Between the Motor Cortex Stimulation (tDCS and rTMS) and the Trans-spinal Stimulation (tsDCS ) in the Algoneurodystrophy of Members. A Randomised Clinical Trial. tDCS : Transcranial Direct-current Stimulation rTMS : Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation tsDCS : Transcutaneous Spinal Direct Current Stimulation

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity Hospital, GrenobleRan2016 to 2022Enrolled36ConditionsAlgoneurodystrophyArmsrTMS, tDCS, tsDCS
NCT07237165 nanot yet recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Evaluation of the Analgesic Effect of Direct Current Stimulation in the Treatment of Pelvic Pain, Comparing Three Groups: Trans-spinal Stimulation, Ganglionic Stimulation, and Placebo. A Randomized Double-blind Study

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity Hospital, GrenobleRan2025 to 2029Enrolled60ConditionsChronic Pelvic PainArmsNon-invasive device-based neuromodulation
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

76 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

16 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

5 authors.

Alberto PrioriCentro Clinico per la Neurostimolazione, le Neurotecnologie e i Disordini del Movimento, Fondazione IRCCS Ca' Granda, Milan, Italy Dipartimento di Fisiopatologia Medico Chirurgica e dei Trapianti, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy alberto.priori@unimi.it.
Matteo CioccaCentro Clinico per la Neurostimolazione, le Neurotecnologie e i Disordini del Movimento, Fondazione IRCCS Ca' Granda, Milan, Italy Dipartimento di Fisiopatologia Medico Chirurgica e dei Trapianti, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy.
Marta ParazziniConsiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche, Istituto di Elettronica e di Ingegneria dell'Informazione e delle Telecomunicazioni, Milan, Italy.
Maurizio VergariCentro Clinico per la Neurostimolazione, le Neurotecnologie e i Disordini del Movimento, Fondazione IRCCS Ca' Granda, Milan, Italy.
Roberta FerrucciCentro Clinico per la Neurostimolazione, le Neurotecnologie e i Disordini del Movimento, Fondazione IRCCS Ca' Granda, Milan, Italy Dipartimento di Fisiopatologia Medico Chirurgica e dei Trapianti, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Two neuromodulatory techniques based on applying direct current (DC) non-invasively through the skin, transcranial cerebellar direct current stimulation (tDCS) and transcutaneous spinal DCS, can induce prolonged functional changes consistent with a direct influence on the human cerebellum and spinal cord. In this article we review the major experimental works on cerebellar tDCS and on spinal tDCS, and their preliminary clinical applications. Cerebellar tDCS modulates cerebellar motor cortical inhibition, gait adaptation, motor behaviour, and cognition (learning, language, memory, attention). Spinal tDCS influences the ascending and descending spinal pathways, and spinal reflex excitability. In the anaesthetised mouse, DC stimulation applied under the skin along the entire spinal cord may affect GABAergic and glutamatergic systems. Preliminary clinical studies in patients with cerebellar disorders, and in animals and patients with spinal cord injuries, have reported beneficial effects. Overall the available data show that cerebellar tDCS and spinal tDCS are two novel approaches for inducing prolonged functional changes and neuroplasticity in the human cerebellum and spinal cord, and both are new tools for experimental and clinical neuroscientists.

Indexed as

AnimalsCerebellumDeep Brain StimulationElectric Stimulation TherapyHumansSpinal CordTranscranial Magnetic StimulationTranscutaneous Electric Nerve Stimulation

Identifiers

PMID24907311
PMCPMC4229333

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.