Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26210573›Full record

SynthesisBrain stimulation

A Meta-analysis of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Studies Examining the Reliability of Effects on Language Measures.

Amy R Price, Harrison McAdams, Murray Grossman, Roy H Hamilton

Abstract readMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Brain stimulation. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 4 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.

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

34 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Evidence-based umbrella review of cognitive effects of prefrontal tDCS.Social cognitive and affective neuroscience · 2022
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Review
  8. Prefrontal and Cerebellar Contributions to Semantic Memory Retrieval.Neurobiology of language (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2026
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

4 authors.

Amy R PriceCenter for Cognitive Neuroscience, Department of Neurology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA.
Harrison McAdamsPerelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia PA 19104, USA.
Murray GrossmanCenter for Cognitive Neuroscience, Department of Neurology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA.
Roy H HamiltonCenter for Cognitive Neuroscience, Department of Neurology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA; Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia PA 19104, USA. Electronic address: roy.hamilton@uphs.upenn.edu.

Funding

MEDICAL SCIENTIST TRAINING PROGRAMT32GM007170 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI BRASS, LAWRENCE F · 1985 to 2022
$54.0M
Transgenic Mouse Models of Tau PathologiesP01AG017586 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI LEE, VIRGINIA M · 2000 to 2021
$37.3M
Training in Alzheimer’s and Age-Related Neurodegenerative DiseasesT32AG000255 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI ALICE S CHEN-PLOTKIN, VIRGINIA M LEE · 1997 to 2026
$12.5M
NIA NIH HHS 5T32AG000255NIA NIH HHS AG017586NIA NIH HHS P01 AG017586NIA NIH HHS T32 AG000255NIGMS NIH HHS T32 GM007170
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTranscranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a brain stimulation technique used to examine causal relationships between brain regions and cognitive functions. The effects from tDCS are complex, and the extent to which stimulation reliably affects different cognitive domains is not fully understood and continues to be debated. OBJECTIVE/HYPOTHESIS: To conduct a meta-analysis of studies examining the effects of single-session anodal tDCS on language.

methodsThe meta-analysis examined the behavioral results from eleven experiments of single-session anodal tDCS and language processing in healthy adults. The means and standard deviations of the outcome measures were extracted from each experiment and entered into the meta-analyses. In the first analysis, we examined the effects of single-session tDCS across all language studies. Next, a series of sub-analyses examined the effects of tDCS on specific tasks and stimulation protocols.

resultsThere was a significant effect from anodal single-session tDCS in healthy adults compared to sham (P = 0.001) across all language measures. Next, we found significant effects on specific stimulation protocols (e.g., offline measures, P = 0.002), as well as specific tasks and electrode montages (e.g., verbal fluency measures and left prefrontal cortex, P = 0.035).

conclusionsThe results indicate that single-session tDCS produces significant and reliable effects on language measures in healthy adults.

Indexed as

LanguageAdultBrainFemaleHumansMaleReproducibility of ResultsTranscranial Direct Current StimulationLanguageMeta-analysisReliabilitytDCSTranscranial direct current stimulationVerbal fluency

Identifiers

PMID26210573
PMCPMC4833093

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.