Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35624201›Full record

Trial reportCerebellum (London, England)2023

M1 and Cerebellar tDCS for MSA-C: a Double-Blind, Randomized, Sham-Controlled, Crossover Study.

Jong Hyeon Ahn, Dongyeong Lee, Minkyeong Kim, Jin Whan Cho, Won Hyuk Chang, Jinyoung Youn

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Cerebellum (London, England), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 28% 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, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Clinical neurophysiology in the treatment of movement disorders: IFCN handbook chapter.Clinical neurophysiology : official journal of the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2024
    Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Jong Hyeon AhnDepartment of Neurology, Samsung Medical Center Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Dongyeong LeeDepartment of Neurology, Samsung Medical Center Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Minkyeong KimDepartment of Neurology, Gyeongsang National University Hospital, Jinju, Korea.
Jin Whan ChoDepartment of Neurology, Samsung Medical Center Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Won Hyuk ChangDepartment of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine, Center for Prevention and Rehabilitation, Heart Vascular Stroke Institute, Samsung Medical Center Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea. wh.chang@samsung.com.
Jinyoung YounDepartment of Neurology, Samsung Medical Center Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea. genian@skku.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3350-5032
Samsung Medical Center · KRGyeongsang National University Hospital · KR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The effect of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) for cerebellar-dominant multiple-system atrophy (MSA-C) is not well elucidated, yet. This study aimed to investigate the effect of tDCS on the primary motor cortex (M1) and cerebellum in patients with MSA-C. We recruited probable MSA-C patients and performed three single sessions of tDCS at each visit in random order (M1, cerebellum or sham). Cerebellar ataxia was evaluated with the International Cooperative Ataxia Rating Scale (ICARS) and objective gait and static balance analyses both before and after each stimulation session. Additionally, we also evaluated the factors related with objective improvement from each stimulation. Sixteen participants were enrolled, and one dropped out after 2 sessions of stimulation due to consent withdrawal. The gait velocity, step time and single support time all significantly improved after the M1 and cerebellar tDCS treatment compared with the sham stimulation while there was no difference in the improvement of ICARS and posturography results among 3 stimulations. In terms of the related factors with improvement of gait velocity, the disease duration, baseline gait speed and single support times were correlated after M1 stimulation, while a higher ICARS score and baseline gait speed in cerebellar stimulation. There were no adverse effects reported after the tDCS sessions. Our results demonstrated that both M1 and cerebellar tDCS demonstrated benefits for MSA-C patients without significant complications. Considering the different related factors with improvement at each stimulation, the mechanism would be different between M1 and cerebellar stimulations.

Indexed as

Cerebellar AtaxiaMultiple System AtrophyTranscranial Direct Current StimulationAtaxiaCerebellumCross-Over StudiesDouble-Blind MethodHumansCerebellar stimulationMultiple system atrophyNon-invasive brain stimulationTranscranial direct current stimulation

Identifiers

PMID35624201
OpenAlexW4281768441

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.