Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33551785›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in aging neuroscience2020

Past, Present, and Future of Non-invasive Brain Stimulation Approaches to Treat Cognitive Impairment in Neurodegenerative Diseases: Time for a Comprehensive Critical Review.

Clara Sanches, Chloé Stengel, Juliette Godard, Justine Mertz, Marc Teichmann, Raffaella Migliaccio, Antoni Valero-Cabré

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in aging neuroscience, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 61 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
61citing papers in PubMed, 8 pooled it
6.9field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

61 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 104 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Digitalized transcranial electrical stimulation: A consensus statement.Clinical neurophysiology : official journal of the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2022
    Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

1 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Clara SanchesCerebral Dynamics, Plasticity and Rehabilitation Group, FRONTLAB Team, CNRS UMR 7225, INSERM U 1127, Institut du Cerveau, Sorbonne Universités, Paris, France.
Chloé StengelCerebral Dynamics, Plasticity and Rehabilitation Group, FRONTLAB Team, CNRS UMR 7225, INSERM U 1127, Institut du Cerveau, Sorbonne Universités, Paris, France.
Juliette GodardCerebral Dynamics, Plasticity and Rehabilitation Group, FRONTLAB Team, CNRS UMR 7225, INSERM U 1127, Institut du Cerveau, Sorbonne Universités, Paris, France.
Justine MertzCerebral Dynamics, Plasticity and Rehabilitation Group, FRONTLAB Team, CNRS UMR 7225, INSERM U 1127, Institut du Cerveau, Sorbonne Universités, Paris, France.
Marc TeichmannCerebral Dynamics, Plasticity and Rehabilitation Group, FRONTLAB Team, CNRS UMR 7225, INSERM U 1127, Institut du Cerveau, Sorbonne Universités, Paris, France.
Raffaella MigliaccioCerebral Dynamics, Plasticity and Rehabilitation Group, FRONTLAB Team, CNRS UMR 7225, INSERM U 1127, Institut du Cerveau, Sorbonne Universités, Paris, France.
Antoni Valero-CabréCerebral Dynamics, Plasticity and Rehabilitation Group, FRONTLAB Team, CNRS UMR 7225, INSERM U 1127, Institut du Cerveau, Sorbonne Universités, Paris, France.
Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique · FRInserm · FRAssistance Publique – Hôpitaux de Paris · FRSorbonne Université · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Low birth rates and increasing life expectancy experienced by developed societies have placed an unprecedented pressure on governments and the health system to deal effectively with the human, social and financial burden associated to aging-related diseases. At present, ∼24 million people worldwide suffer from cognitive neurodegenerative diseases, a prevalence that doubles every five years. Pharmacological therapies and cognitive training/rehabilitation have generated temporary hope and, occasionally, proof of mild relief. Nonetheless, these approaches are yet to demonstrate a meaningful therapeutic impact and changes in prognosis. We here review evidence gathered for nearly a decade on non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS), a less known therapeutic strategy aiming to limit cognitive decline associated with neurodegenerative conditions. Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation and Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation, two of the most popular NIBS technologies, use electrical fields generated non-invasively in the brain to long-lastingly enhance the excitability/activity of key brain regions contributing to relevant cognitive processes. The current comprehensive critical review presents proof-of-concept evidence and meaningful cognitive outcomes of NIBS in eight of the most prevalent neurodegenerative pathologies affecting cognition: Alzheimer's Disease, Parkinson's Disease, Dementia with Lewy Bodies, Primary Progressive Aphasias (PPA), behavioral variant of Frontotemporal Dementia, Corticobasal Syndrome, Progressive Supranuclear Palsy, and Posterior Cortical Atrophy. We analyzed a total of 70 internationally published studies: 33 focusing on Alzheimer's disease, 19 on PPA and 18 on the remaining neurodegenerative pathologies. The therapeutic benefit and clinical significance of NIBS remains inconclusive, in particular given the lack of a sufficient number of double-blind placebo-controlled randomized clinical trials using multiday stimulation regimes, the heterogeneity of the protocols, and adequate behavioral and neuroimaging response biomarkers, able to show lasting effects and an impact on prognosis. The field remains promising but, to make further progress, research efforts need to take in account the latest evidence of the anatomical and neurophysiological features underlying cognitive deficits in these patient populations. Moreover, as the development of

Indexed as

brain networkscognitive declinecognitive trainingneurodegenerative diseasesnon-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS)transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS)Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS)

Identifiers

PMID33551785
PMCPMC7854576
OpenAlexW3122425186

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.