Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26873962›Full record

ReviewThe Neuroscientist : a review journal bringing neurobiology, neurology and psychiatry2017

Transcranial Electrical Stimulation: What We Know and Do Not Know About Mechanisms.

Anna Fertonani, Carlo Miniussi

Registry-linked trialAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in The Neuroscientist : a review journal bringing neurobiology, neurology and psychiatry, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07239427 (Use of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation), which is not on this map. Cited by 216 papers, 17 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
216citing papers in PubMed, 17 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.

NCT07239427 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Use of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (TDCS) in an Active Pain Coping Program for Patients With Fibromyalgia: A Randomized Control Trial.

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of ValladolidRan2025 to 2026Enrolled68ConditionsFibromyalgiaArmsPain Science Education, Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation, Therapeutic Exercise, Sham Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

216 citing papers in PubMed, 17 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Comparative efficacy of different noninvasive brain stimulation protocols on upper-extremity motor function and activities of daily living after stroke: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2024
    Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Pooled it
  15. Pooled it
  16. Pooled it
  17. Pooled it
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial

156 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

2 authors.

Anna Fertonani1 Cognitive Neuroscience Section, IRCCS Centro San Giovanni di Dio Fatebenefratelli, Brescia, Italy.
Carlo Miniussi1 Cognitive Neuroscience Section, IRCCS Centro San Giovanni di Dio Fatebenefratelli, Brescia, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In recent years, there has been remarkable progress in the understanding and practical use of transcranial electrical stimulation (tES) techniques. Nevertheless, to date, this experimental effort has not been accompanied by substantial reflections on the models and mechanisms that could explain the stimulation effects. Given these premises, the aim of this article is to provide an updated picture of what we know about the theoretical models of tES that have been proposed to date, contextualized in a more specific and unitary framework. We demonstrate that these models can explain the tES behavioral effects as distributed along a continuum from stimulation dependent to network activity dependent. In this framework, we also propose that stochastic resonance is a useful mechanism to explain the general online neuromodulation effects of tES. Moreover, we highlight the aspects that should be considered in future research. We emphasize that tES is not an "easy-to-use" technique; however, it may represent a very fruitful approach if applied within rigorous protocols, with deep knowledge of both the behavioral and cognitive aspects and the more recent advances in the application of stimulation.

Indexed as

Models, TheoreticalBrainEvoked PotentialsHumansTranscranial Direct Current StimulationcognitionmodelsneuroenhancementneuromodulationNIBSnoninvasive brain stimulationstochastic resonancetACStDCStEStRNS

Identifiers

PMID26873962
PMCPMC5405830

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.