SynthesisRestorative neurology and neuroscience2020
Non-invasive current stimulation in vision recovery: a review of the literature.
Synthesis in Restorative neurology and neuroscience, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
23 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Trans-Synaptic Retrograde Retinal Degeneration After Post-Chiasmatic Stroke: A Systematic Review of Empirical Evidence.European journal of neurology · 2026Pooled it
- Mapping the Causal Correlates of Risky and Ambiguous Decision-Making: Evidence from tES Research.Brain topography · 2025Pooled it
- Noninvasive electrical stimulation as a neuroprotective strategy in retinal diseases: a systematic review of preclinical studies.Journal of translational medicine · 2024Pooled it
- Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Does Not Enhance Perceptual Learning of Chinese Character Reading in Adults With Macular Degeneration.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2026Trial
- Enhancing multisensory rehabilitation of visual field defects with transcranial direct current stimulation: A randomized clinical trial.European journal of neurology · 2025Trial
- Trial
- Baseline Motor Impairment Predicts Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Combined with Physical Therapy-Induced Improvement in Individuals with Chronic Stroke.Neural plasticity · 2020Trial
- Modalities of vision restoration in optic neuropathies and retinal disease.Progress in retinal and eye research · 2026Review
- Noninvasive transcranial brain stimulation for eye diseases and visual dysfunctions: A systematic review of RCTs.iScience · 2025Article
- The role of RGC degeneration in the pathogenesis of glaucoma.International journal of biological sciences · 2025Review
- Effectiveness and Safety of Non-Invasive Neuromodulation for Vision Restoration: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Neuro-ophthalmology (Aeolus Press) · 2024Review
- Optic nerve-mediated modulation of temporally interfering electric fields for potential targeted retinal disease therapy: a computational modeling study.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2024Article
- The effects of occipital and parietal tDCS on chronic visual field defects after brain injury.Frontiers in neurology · 2024Article
- Fabrication and Characterization of a Flexible Thin-Film-Based Array of Microelectrodes for Corneal Electrical Stimulation.Micromachines · 2023Article
- Electrical stimulation alters DNA methylation and promotes neurite outgrowth.Journal of cellular biochemistry · 2023Article
- Transcorneal Electrical Stimulation Dose-Dependently Slows the Visual Field Loss in Retinitis Pigmentosa.Translational vision science & technology · 2023Article
- Solutions to a Radical Problem: Overview of Current and Future Treatment Strategies in Leber's Hereditary Opic Neuropathy.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Review
- Transcranial random noise stimulation and exercise do not modulate ocular dominance plasticity in adults with normal vision.Journal of vision · 2022Article
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAround 253 million people worldwide suffer from irreversible visual damage. Numerous studies have been carried out in order to unveil the effects of electrical stimulation (ES) as a useful tool for rehabilitation for different visual conditions and pathologies.
objectiveThis systematic review aimed to 1) examine the current evidence of ES efficacy for the treatment of visual pathologies and 2) define the corresponding degree of the recommendation of different ES techniques.
methodsA systematic review was conducted in MEDLINE and Cochrane Library database to collect documents published between 2000 and 2018. For each study, Level of Evidence of Effectiveness of ES as well as the Class of Quality for the treatment of different visual pathologies were determined.
resultsThirty-eight articles were included. Studies were grouped according to the pathology treated and the type of stimulation administered. The first group included studies treating pre-chiasmatic pathologies (age-related macular degeneration, macular dystrophy, retinal artery occlusion, retinitis pigmentosa, glaucoma, optic nerve damage, and optic neuropathy) using pre-chiasmatic stimulation; the second group included studies treating both pre-chiasmatic pathologies (amblyopia, myopia) and post-chiasmatic pathologies or brain conditions (hemianopsia, brain trauma) by means of post-chiasmatic stimulation. In the first group, repetitive transorbital alternating current stimulation (rtACS) reached level A recommendation, and transcorneal electrical stimulation (tcES) reached level B. In the second group, both high-frequency random noise stimulation (hf-RNS) and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) reached level C recommendation.
conclusionsStudy's findings suggest conclusive evidence for rtACS treatment. For other protocols results are promising but not conclusive since the examined studies assessed different stimulation parameters and endpoints. A comparison of the effects of different combinations of these variables still lacks in the literature. Further studies are needed to optimize existing protocols and determine if different protocols are needed for different diseases.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.