SynthesisSocial cognitive and affective neuroscience2022
Evidence-based umbrella review of cognitive effects of prefrontal tDCS.
Synthesis in Social cognitive and affective neuroscience, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- An electric field modeling study with meta-analysis to understand the antidepressant effects of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS).Revista brasileira de psiquiatria (Sao Paulo, Brazil : 1999)Pooled it
- Effects of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on pain and pain-related outcomes: an umbrella review.The Korean journal of pain · 2025Article
- The Effect of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (TDCS) on Cognitive Functioning in Individuals with Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD).Clinical neuropsychiatry · 2025Article
- Review
- Neuromodulatory effect of transcranial direct current stimulation on cue reactivity and craving in young adults with internet gaming disorder: an event-related potential study.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
- Stress and Right Prefrontal Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) Interactive Effects on Visual Working Memory and Learning.Brain sciences · 2023Article
- Transcranial direct current stimulation for post-COVID fatigue: a randomized, double-blind, controlled pilot study.Brain communications · 2023Article
- Transcranial direct current stimulation versus intermittent theta-burst stimulation for the improvement of working memory performance.International journal of clinical and health psychology : IJCHPArticle
- Combined effects of theta-burst stimulation with transcranial direct current stimulation of the prefrontal cortex: study protocol of a randomized, double-blinded, sham-controlled trial using 99mTc-ECD SPECT.Trends in psychiatry and psychotherapyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a non-invasive brain stimulation technique, which has been increasingly used as an investigational tool in neuroscience. In social and affective neuroscience research, the prefrontal cortex has been primarily targeted, since this brain region is critically involved in complex psychobiological processes subserving both Șhotș and Școldș domains. Although several studies have suggested that prefrontal tDCS can enhance neuropsychological outcomes, meta-analyses have reported conflicting results. Therefore, we aimed to assess the available evidence by performing an umbrella review of meta-analyses. We evaluated the effects of prefrontal active vs sham tDCS on different domains of cognition among healthy and neuropsychiatric individuals. A MeaSurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews 2 was employed to evaluate the quality of meta-analyses, and the GRADE system was employed to grade the quality of evidence of every comparison from each meta-analysis. PubMed/MEDLINE, PsycINFO and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched, and 11 meta-analyses were included resulting in 55 comparisons. Only 16 comparisons reported significant effects favoring tDCS, but 13 of them had either very low or low quality of evidence. Of the remaining 39 comparisons which reported non-significant effects, 38 had either very low or low quality of evidence. Meta-analyses were rated as having critically low and low quality. Among several reasons to explain these findings, the lack of consensus and reproducibility in tDCS research is discussed.
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.