ArticleFrontiers in human neuroscience2021
Functional Network Alterations as Markers for Predicting the Treatment Outcome of Cathodal Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation in Focal Epilepsy.
Article in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 2 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy of transcranial direct current stimulation on seizure control in patients with refractory epilepsy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Neurosurgical review · 2025Pooled it
- Transcranial current stimulation in epilepsy: A systematic review of the fundamental and clinical aspects.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2022Pooled it
- Predicting response to neuromodulation therapies in drug-resistant epilepsy using machine learning models: a meta-analysis and systematic review.Bioelectronic medicine · 2025Review
- Epileptogenic zone characteristics determine effectiveness of electrical transcranial stimulation in epilepsy treatment.Brain communications · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background and purposeTranscranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is an emerging non-invasive neuromodulation technique for focal epilepsy. Because epilepsy is a disease affecting the brain network, our study was aimed to evaluate and predict the treatment outcome of cathodal tDCS (ctDCS) by analyzing the ctDCS-induced functional network alterations.
methodsEither the active 5-day, -1.0 mA, 20-min ctDCS or sham ctDCS targeting at the most active interictal epileptiform discharge regions was applied to 27 subjects suffering from focal epilepsy. The functional networks before and after ctDCS were compared employing graph theoretical analysis based on the functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) data. A support vector machine (SVM) prediction model was built to predict the treatment outcome of ctDCS using the graph theoretical measures as markers.
resultsOur results revealed that the mean clustering coefficient and the global efficiency decreased significantly, as well as the characteristic path length and the mean shortest path length at the stimulation sites in the fMRI functional networks increased significantly after ctDCS only for the patients with response to the active ctDCS (at least 20% reduction rate of seizure frequency). Our prediction model achieved the mean prediction accuracy of 68.3% (mean sensitivity: 70.0%; mean specificity: 67.5%) after the nested cross validation. The mean area under the receiver operating curve was 0.75, which showed good prediction performance.
conclusionThe study demonstrated that the response to ctDCS was related to the topological alterations in the functional networks of epilepsy patients detected by fMRI. The graph theoretical measures were promising for clinical prediction of ctDCS treatment outcome.
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.