Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35370603›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in aging neuroscience2022

Influence of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Dosage and Associated Therapy on Motor Recovery Post-stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Alan-Michael D Chow, Jeonghwa Shin, Hongwu Wang, Jeremy Mikhail Kellawan, Hugo M Pereira

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in aging neuroscience, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06893653 (Combined Effects of Focal Muscle Vibration and tDCS on Motor Recovery in Stroke), which is not on this map. Cited by 10 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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.

NCT06893653 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Combined Effects of Focal Muscle Vibration and tDCS on Motor Recovery in Stroke

TypeinterventionalSponsorRiphah International UniversityRan2025 to 2026Enrolled60ConditionsStrokeArmsFocal muscle vibration, tDCS, Physical Therapy, Focal muscle vibration & tDCS
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Transcranial direct current stimulation is safe and feasible in hyperacute ischemic stroke (DICAST-SF trial).Neurotherapeutics : the journal of the American Society for Experimental NeuroTherapeutics · 2026
    Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Alan-Michael D ChowDepartment of Health and Exercise Science, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK, United States.
Jeonghwa ShinDepartment of Health and Exercise Science, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK, United States.
Hongwu WangDepartment of Occupational Therapy, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States.
Jeremy Mikhail KellawanDepartment of Health and Exercise Science, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK, United States.
Hugo M PereiraDepartment of Health and Exercise Science, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK, United States.
University of Oklahoma · USUniversity of Florida · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: (1) To determine the impact of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) applied alone or combined with other therapies on the recovery of motor function after stroke and (2) To determine tDCS dosage effect. Methods: Randomized controlled trials comparing the effects of tDCS with sham, using the Barthel Index (BI), the upper and lower extremity Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA), and the Modified Ashworth Scale (MAS), were retrieved from PubMed, Medline (EBSCO), and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) from their inception to June 2021. Calculations for each assessment were done for the overall effect and associated therapy accounting for the influence of stroke severity or stimulation parameters. Results: A total of 31 studies involving metrics of the BI, the upper extremity FMA, the lower extremity FMA, and the MAS were included. tDCS combined with other therapies was beneficial when assessed by the BI (mean difference: 6.8; Conclusion: Potential benefits of tDCS can vary depending on assessment tool used, duration of stroke, and associated therapy. Mechanistic studies are needed to understand the potential role of stimulation type and dosage effect after stroke. Future studies should carefully conduct group randomization, control for duration of stroke, and report different motor recovery assessments types. Systematic Review Registration: [https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/], identifier [CRD42021290670].

Indexed as

Ashworth ScaleBarthel Indexbrain stimulationFugl–MeyerrehabiliatationstroketDCS

Identifiers

PMID35370603
PMCPMC8972130
OpenAlexW4220963530

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.