Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29053684›Full record

ArticleJournal of visualized experiments : JoVE2017

Remotely Supervised Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation: An Update on Safety and Tolerability.

Michael T Shaw, Margaret Kasschau, Bryan Dobbs, Natalie Pawlak, William Pau, Kathleen Sherman, Marom Bikson, Abhishek Datta, Leigh E Charvet

Abstract readVideo-Audio Media
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of visualized experiments : JoVE, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Review
  8. Long-term use of tDCS-clinical and ethical considerations.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2026
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  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

9 authors.

Michael T ShawNew York University, Langone Medical Center.
Margaret KasschauStony Brook Medicine.
Bryan DobbsNew York University, Langone Medical Center.
Natalie PawlakNew York University, Langone Medical Center.
William PauNew York University, Langone Medical Center.
Kathleen ShermanNew York University, Langone Medical Center.
Marom BiksonCity College of New York.
Abhishek DattaSoterix Medical.
Leigh E CharvetNew York University, Langone Medical Center; Leigh.Charvet@nyumc.org.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The remotely supervised tDCS (RS-tDCS) protocol enables participation from home through guided and monitored self-administration of tDCS treatment while maintaining clinical standards. The current consensus regarding the efficacy of tDCS is that multiple treatment sessions are needed to observe targeted behavioral reductions in symptom burden. However, the requirement for patients to travel to clinic daily for stimulation sessions presents a major obstacle for potential participants, due to work or family obligations or limited ability to travel. This study presents a protocol that directly overcomes these obstacles by eliminating the need to travel to clinic for daily sessions. This is an updated protocol for remotely supervised self-administration of tDCS for daily treatment sessions paired with a program of computer-based cognitive training for use in clinical trials. Participants only need to attend clinic twice, for a baseline and study-end visit. At baseline, participants are trained and provided with a study stimulation device, and a small laptop computer. Participants then complete the remainder of their stimulation sessions at home while they are monitored via videoconferencing software. Participants complete computerized cognitive remediation during stimulation sessions, which may serve a therapeutic role or as a "placeholder" for other computer-based activity. Computers are enabled for real-time monitoring and remote control by study staff. Outcome measures that assess feasibility and tolerance are administered remotely with the aid of visual analogue scales that are presented onscreen. Following completion of all RS-tDCS sessions, participants return to clinic for a study end visit in which all study equipment is returned. Results support the safety, feasibility, and scalability of the RS-tDCS protocol for use in clinical trials. Across 46 patients, 748 RS-tDCS sessions have been completed. This protocol serves as a model for use in future clinical trials involving tDCS.

Indexed as

AdultFemaleHumansMaleTranscranial Direct Current StimulationYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID29053684
PMCPMC5752383

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.