Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27147949›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in neuroscience2016

Value and Efficacy of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation in the Cognitive Rehabilitation: A Critical Review Since 2000.

Davide Cappon, Marjan Jahanshahi, Patrizia Bisiacchi

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
6.9field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

39 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 90 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Digitalized transcranial electrical stimulation: A consensus statement.Clinical neurophysiology : official journal of the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2022
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Neural Mechanisms Underlying Robust Target Selection in Response to Microstimulation of the Oculomotor System.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Davide CapponDepartment of General Psychology, Center for Cognitive Neuroscience, University of Padova Padua, Italy.
Marjan JahanshahiSobell Department of Motor Neuroscience and Movement Disorders, Institute of Neurology, University College London London, UK.
Patrizia BisiacchiDepartment of General Psychology, Center for Cognitive Neuroscience, University of Padova Padua, Italy.
University of Padua · ITSobell House · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Non-invasive brain stimulation techniques, including transcranial direct current stimulation (t-DCS) have been used in the rehabilitation of cognitive function in a spectrum of neurological disorders. The present review outlines methodological communalities and differences of t-DCS procedures in neurocognitive rehabilitation. We consider the efficacy of tDCS for the management of specific cognitive deficits in four main neurological disorders by providing a critical analysis of recent studies that have used t-DCS to improve cognition in patients with Parkinson's Disease, Alzheimer's Disease, Hemi-spatial Neglect, and Aphasia. The evidence from this innovative approach to cognitive rehabilitation suggests that tDCS can influence cognition. However, the results show a high variability between studies both in terms of the methodological approach adopted and the cognitive functions targeted. The review also focuses both on methodological issues such as technical aspects of the stimulation (electrode position and dimension; current intensity; duration of protocol) and on the inclusion of appropriate assessment tools for cognition. A further aspect considered is the optimal timing for administration of tDCS: before, during or after cognitive rehabilitation. We conclude that more studies using common methodology are needed to gain a better understanding of the efficacy of tDCS as a new tool for rehabilitation of cognitive disorders in a range of neurological disorders.

Indexed as

Alzheimer's disease (AD)Aphasiacognitive rehabilitationneurocognitive disordersParkinson's disease (PD)transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS)unilateral neglect

Identifiers

PMID27147949
PMCPMC4834357
OpenAlexW2337178677

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.