Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32498606›Full record

Trial reportNeuropsychological rehabilitation2021

Non-invasive brain stimulation in Stroke patients (NIBS): A prospective randomized open blinded end-point (PROBE) feasibility trial using transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) in post-stroke hemispatial neglect.

Gemma Learmonth, Christopher S Y Benwell, Gesine Märker, Diana Dascalu, Matthew Checketts, Celestine Santosh, Mark Barber, Matthew Walters, Keith W Muir, Monika Harvey

Erratum issuedOpen access · bronzeAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Neuropsychological rehabilitation, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 24% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Advances in the Rehabilitation of Hemispatial Inattention.Current neurology and neuroscience reports · 2023
    Review
  6. Narrative Review of Noninvasive Brain Stimulation in Stroke Rehabilitation.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2022
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Gemma LearmonthInstitute of Neuroscience and Psychology, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4061-4464
Christopher S Y BenwellSchool of Psychology, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
Gesine MärkerSchool of Psychology, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
Diana DascaluSchool of Psychology, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
Matthew CheckettsSchool of Psychology, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5330-8242
Celestine SantoshQueen Elizabeth University Hospital, Glasgow, UK.
Mark BarberUniversity Hospital Monklands, Lanarkshire, UK.
Matthew WaltersInstitute of Cardiovascular and Medical Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
Keith W MuirInstitute of Neuroscience and Psychology, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
Monika HarveySchool of Psychology, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
University of Glasgow · GBMonklands Hospital · GBQueen Elizabeth University Hospital · GBUniversity of Dundee · GBUniversity of Manchester · GB

Funding

Chief Scientist Office ETM/353Medical Research Council MR/N003403/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Up to 80% of people who experience a right-hemisphere stroke suffer from hemispatial neglect. This syndrome is debilitating and impedes rehabilitation. We carried out a clinical feasibility trial of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and a behavioural rehabilitation programme, alone or in combination, in patients with neglect. Patients >4 weeks post right hemisphere stroke were randomized to 10 sessions of tDCS, 10 sessions of a behavioural intervention, combined intervention, or a control task. Primary outcomes were recruitment and retention rates, with secondary outcomes effect sizes on measures of neglect and quality of life, assessed directly after the interventions, and at 6 months follow up. Of 288 confirmed stroke cases referred (representing 7% of confirmed strokes), we randomized 8% (0.6% of stroke cases overall). The largest number of exclusions (91/288 (34%)) were due to medical comorbidities that prevented patients from undergoing 10 intervention sessions. We recruited 24 patients over 29 months, with 87% completing immediate post-intervention and 67% 6 month evaluations. We established poor feasibility of a clinical trial requiring repeated hospital-based tDCS within a UK hospital healthcare setting, either with or without behavioural training, over a sustained time period. Future trials should consider intensity, duration and location of tDCS neglect interventions.

Indexed as

Perceptual DisordersStroke RehabilitationTranscranial Direct Current StimulationBrainDouble-Blind MethodFeasibility StudiesHumansProspective StudiesQuality of LifeHemispatial neglectNon-invasive brain stimulationProspective randomized open blinded end-point (PROBE) trialStrokeTranscranial direct current stimulation (tDCS)

Identifiers

PMID32498606
PMCPMC8372288
OpenAlexW3025548752

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.