Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29784589›Full record

Trial reportBrain stimulation

Tolerability and blinding of 4x1 high-definition transcranial direct current stimulation (HD-tDCS) at two and three milliamps.

Jaclyn Reckow, Annalise Rahman-Filipiak, Sarah Garcia, Stephen Schlaefflin, Oliver Calhoun, Alexandre F DaSilva, Marom Bikson, Benjamin M Hampstead

2 registry-linked trialsAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Brain stimulation. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 51 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
51citing papers in PubMed, 1 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.

NCT06048159 narecruitingnot on this map

TACS for the Recovery of Phonological STM After Stroke

TypeinterventionalSponsorMedical College of WisconsinRan2023 to 2033Enrolled120ConditionsStroke, AphasiaArmsHD-tACS, Sham HD-tACS
NCT06775145 nanot yet recruitingnot on this map

Therapeutic Effect of Neuromodulation on Anxiety Disorders by High-Definition Transcranial Electrical Stimulation

TypeinterventionalSponsorNational Taiwan University HospitalRan2025 to 2025Enrolled100ConditionsGeneralized Anxiety Disorder (GAD)ArmsHD-R_cDC+cTBS & sham-L_aDC+iTBS, sham-R_cDC+cTBS & HD-L_aDC+iTBS, HD-R_cDC+cTBS & HD-L_aDC+iTBS, sham-R_cDC+cTBS & sham-L_aDC+iTBS
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

51 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  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

8 authors.

Jaclyn ReckowVeterans Affairs Ann Arbor Healthcare System, Mental Health Service (116B), Ann Arbor, MI, USA; University of Michigan, Department of Psychiatry, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Annalise Rahman-FilipiakVeterans Affairs Ann Arbor Healthcare System, Mental Health Service (116B), Ann Arbor, MI, USA; University of Michigan, Department of Psychiatry, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Sarah GarciaUniversity of Michigan, Department of Psychiatry, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Stephen SchlaefflinMichigan Alzheimer's Disease Center, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Oliver CalhounMichigan Alzheimer's Disease Center, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Alexandre F DaSilvaHeadache & Orofacial Pain Effort (H.O.P.E.), Biologic & Materials Sciences, University of Michigan School of Dentistry, USA.
Marom BiksonDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, The City College of New York, New York, NY, USA.
Benjamin M HampsteadVeterans Affairs Ann Arbor Healthcare System, Mental Health Service (116B), Ann Arbor, MI, USA; University of Michigan, Department of Psychiatry, Ann Arbor, MI, USA; Michigan Alzheimer's Disease Center, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. Electronic address: bhampste@med.umich.edu.

Funding

Michigan Alzheimer's Disease Core CenterP30AG053760 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI PAULSON, HENRY L · 2016 to 2020
$10.1M
Investigation and Modulation of the Central Mu-Opioid Mechanism in Migraine (in vivo)R01NS094413 · NINDS · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI ALEXANDRE DASILVA · 2015 to 2026
$4.3M
Investigation and Modulation of the Mu-Opioid Mechanism in Chronic TMD (in vivo)U01DE025633 · NIDCR · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI DASILVA, ALEXANDRE · 2016 to 2020
$2.4M
Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation for Post-Traumatic Stress DisorderR21MH102539 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI HAMPSTEAD, BENJAMIN MICHAEL · 2014 to 2015
$497k
Promoting adaptive neuroplasticity in mild cognitive impairmentI01RX001534 · VA · VETERANS HEALTH ADMINISTRATION · PI HAMPSTEAD, BENJAMIN MICHAEL · 2015 to 2022
–
Enhancing spatial navigation using non-invasive brain stimulationI21RX001381 · VA · VETERANS HEALTH ADMINISTRATION · PI HAMPSTEAD, BENJAMIN MICHAEL · 2014 to 2015
–
NIA NIH HHS P30 AG053760NIDCR NIH HHS U01 DE025633NIMH NIH HHS R21 MH102539NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS094413RRD VA I01 RX001534RRD VA I21 RX001381
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTranscranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is an in-demand form of neuromodulation generally regarded as safe and well tolerated. However, few studies have examined the safety, tolerability, or blinding of High Definition (HD-) tDCS, especially in older adults and at stimulation intensities of 2 milliamps (mA) or greater.

objectiveWe examined the rates of serious adverse events and common side effects to establish safety and tolerability, respectively, in HD-tDCS. Blinding was evaluated using participants' accuracy in correctly stating their condition (i.e., active or sham).

methodsThe sample included 101 older adults (M

resultsThere were no serious adverse events and no participants withdrew, suggesting that HD-tDCS meets basic safety parameters. Tolerability was comparable between active and sham HD-tDCS regardless of intensity (2 mA and 3 mA) in first session (allp > .09). Tingling was the most commonly endorsed item (59% active; 56% sham) followed by burning sensation (51% active; 50% sham), the majority of which were mild in nature. "Severe" ratings were reported in fewer than 4% of sessions. Blinding appeared adequate since there were no significant group differences between individuals correctly stating their stimulation condition (χ2 = 0.689, p = .679). The above tolerability and blinding findings generally persisted when multiple session data (i.e., 186 total sessions) were considered.

conclusionsHD-tDCS appears well-tolerated and safe with effective sham-control in older adults, even at 3 mA. These data support the use of HD-tDCS in randomized controlled trials and clinical translation efforts.

Indexed as

AgedAphasia, Primary ProgressiveCognitive DysfunctionDouble-Blind MethodFemaleHeadacheHumansLeukoencephalopathiesMaleMiddle AgedPainStress Disorders, Post-TraumaticSurveys and QuestionnairesTranscranial Direct Current StimulationAdverse eventsHD-tDCSSafetySham

Identifiers

PMID29784589
PMCPMC6512313

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.