Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26193817›Full record

SynthesisSpinal cord2015

Effectiveness of transcranial direct current stimulation for the management of neuropathic pain after spinal cord injury: a meta-analysis.

S Mehta, A McIntyre, S Guy, R W Teasell, E Loh

2 registry-linked trialsOpen access · bronzeAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Spinal cord, 2015. 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 30 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
4.3field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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.

NCT05350033 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2021, after this paper: background citation

Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on Inhibitory Control in Addictions: a Triple-blinded, Sham-controlled Clinical Trial.

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversidad de AlmeriaRan2021 to 2022Enrolled200ConditionsSubstance-Related DisordersArmstDCS - tDCS, tDCS - Sham, Sham - tDCS, Sham - Sham
NCT06994390 nanot yet recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2026, after this paper: background citation

Neuropathic Pain Intervention With tDCS in Brazilian Military Personnel Randomized Controlled Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorHospital da Polícia Militar de GoiásRan2026 to 2030Enrolled120ConditionsNeuropathic Pain, Sleep Quality, Transcranial Direct Current StimulationArmstDCS, sham intervention
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

30 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 64 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Efficacy of neuromodulation and rehabilitation approaches on pain relief in patients with spinal cord injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Cortical stimulation for chronic pain: from anecdote to evidence.European journal of physical and rehabilitation medicine · 2022
    Review
  15. Review
  16. Non-invasive Brain Stimulation for Central Neuropathic Pain.Frontiers in molecular neuroscience · 2022
    Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.

S MehtaAging, Rehabilitation, and Geriatric Care, Lawson Health Research Institute, London, Ontario, Canada.
A McIntyreAging, Rehabilitation, and Geriatric Care, Lawson Health Research Institute, London, Ontario, Canada.
S GuyAging, Rehabilitation, and Geriatric Care, Lawson Health Research Institute, London, Ontario, Canada.
R W TeasellAging, Rehabilitation, and Geriatric Care, Lawson Health Research Institute, London, Ontario, Canada.
E LohAging, Rehabilitation, and Geriatric Care, Lawson Health Research Institute, London, Ontario, Canada.
Parkwood Institute · CALawson Health Research Institute · CAWestern University · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine the effect of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) on reducing neuropathic pain intensity in individuals with spinal cord injury (SCI).

methodsMedline, CINAHL, EMBASE and PsycINFO databases were searched for all relevant articles published from 1980 to November 2014. Trials were included if (i) tDCS intervention group and a placebo control group were present; (ii) at least 50% of participants in the study had an SCI and there were at least three participants; (iii) participants were aged 18 years or older; and (iv) persistent pain for at least 3 months. Studies were excluded if: (i) the tDCS intervention group was compared with an active treatment group; (ii) there was insufficient reporting detail to enable pooling of data; and (iii) it was a nonclinical trial (that is, reviews, epidemiology, basic sciences). A standardized mean difference (SMD) ± s.e. and 95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated for each outcome of interest and the results were pooled using a fixed or random effects model, as appropriate. Effect sizes were interpreted as: small > 0.2, moderate > 0.5, large > 0.8.

resultsFive studies met inclusion criteria of which four were randomized controlled trials and one was a prospective controlled trial. The pooled analysis found a significant effect of tDCS on reducing neuropathic pain after SCI post treatment (SMD = 0.510 ± 0.202; 95% CI, 0.114-0.906; P < 0.012); however, this effect was not maintained at follow-up (SMD = 0.353 ± 0.272; 95% CI, -0.179 to 0.886; P < 0.194). A reduction of 1.33 units on a 10-item scale was observed post treatment. No significant adverse events were reported.

conclusionMeta-analytic results indicate a moderate effect of tDCS in reducing neuropathic pain among individuals with SCI; however, the effect was not maintained at follow-up. A mean pooled decrease of 1.33 units on a 10-item scale was found post treatment. Several factors were implicated in the effectiveness of tDCS in reducing pain. Due to the limited number of studies and lack of follow-up, more evidence is required before treatment recommendations can be made.

Indexed as

AnimalsDisease ManagementHumansNeuralgiaSpinal Cord InjuriesTranscranial Direct Current Stimulation

Identifiers

PMID26193817
OpenAlexW1546930821

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.