Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28786014›Full record

SynthesisCerebellum (London, England)2018

Targeting the Human Cerebellum with Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation to Modulate Behavior: a Meta-Analysis.

Viola Oldrati, Dennis J L G Schutter

Registry-linked trialOpen access · hybridAbstract readMeta-AnalysisReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Cerebellum (London, England), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05781412 (Modulation of the Activity in the Cerebellum With Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation in Autistic Participants), which is not on this map. Cited by 84 papers, 9 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
84citing papers in PubMed, 9 pooled it
6.4field-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.

NCT05781412 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2022, after this paper: background citation

Modulation of the Activity in the Cerebellum With Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation in Autistic Participants

TypeinterventionalSponsorBeatriz CatoiraRan2022 to 2024Enrolled100ConditionsAutism Spectrum DisorderArmstDCS
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

84 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 140 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Cerebellar Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation in Spinocerebellar Ataxia Type 3: a Randomized, Double-Blind, Sham-Controlled Trial.Neurotherapeutics : the journal of the American Society for Experimental NeuroTherapeutics · 2022
    Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial

24 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 at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Viola OldratiDepartment of Brain and Behavioral Sciences, University of Pavia, Piazza A. Botta 6, 27100, Pavia, Italy.
Dennis J L G SchutterDonders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour, Radboud University, Montessorilaan 3, 6525 HR, Nijmegen, The Netherlands. d.schutter@donders.ru.nl.
Radboud University Nijmegen · NLUniversity of Pavia · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is increasingly used to study motor- and non-motor-related functions of the cerebellum. The aim of the present study was to quantitatively review available studies to estimate the efficacy of cerebellar tDCS in altering motor- and cognitive-related behavioral performance in healthy volunteers. The present meta-analysis included 32 sham-controlled studies. Results from random effects modeling of the cumulative effect size demonstrated that anodal and cathodal tDCS to the cerebellum were effective in changing performance. No evidence for polarity-dependent effects of cerebellar tDCS was found. Current findings establish the feasibility to target motor and non-motor-related cerebellar functions with tDCS, but arguably due to anatomical differences between the cerebellum and cerebral cortex, the polarity of tDCS is not predictive of the direction of the behavioral changes in healthy volunteers.

Indexed as

BehaviorCerebellumHumansTranscranial Direct Current StimulationCerebellumCognitionMeta-analysisMotorPerformanceTranscranial direct current stimulation

Identifiers

PMID28786014
PMCPMC5849643
OpenAlexW2743099102

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.