Trial reportScientific reports2023
Frontal two-electrode transcranial direct current stimulation protocols may not affect performance on a combined flanker Go/No-Go task.
Trial report in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cross-modal conflict control deficits in male patients with substance use disorder are primarily associated with the response level.Psychopharmacology · 2026Article
- Low intensity transcranial electric stimulation: Safety, ethical, legal regulatory and application guidelines (2017-2025: An update) - endorsed by the European Society for Brain Stimulation (ESBS) and by the International Federation for Clinical Neurophysiology (IFCN).Clinical neurophysiology : official journal of the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2026Review
- From Cortex to Cardiac Response: tDCS of the Prefrontal Cortex Improves Autonomic Markers of Emotion Regulation.Brain sciences · 2025Article
- HD-tDCS improves conflict processing and general behavioral stability.Scientific reports · 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
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has been tested to modulate cognitive control or response inhibition using various electrode montages. However, electrode montages and current polarities have not been systematically compared when examining tDCS effects on cognitive control and response inhibition. In this randomized, sham-controlled study, 38 healthy volunteers were randomly grouped into receiving one session of sham, anodal, and cathodal each in an electrode montage that targeted either the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) or the fronto-medial (FM) region. Participants performed a combined flanker Go/No-Go task during stimulation. No effect of tDCS was found in the DLPFC and FM groups neither using anodal nor cathodal stimulation. No major adverse effects of tDCS were identified using either montage or stimulation type and the two groups did not differ in terms of the reported sensations. The present study suggests that single-session tDCS delivered in two two-electrode montages might not affect cognitive control or response inhibition, despite using widely popular stimulation parameters. This is in line with the heterogeneous findings in the field and calls for further systematic research to exclude less reliable methods from those with more pronounced effects, identify the determinants of responsiveness, and develop optimal ways to utilize this technique.
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.