Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37640926›Full record

SynthesisSpinal cord2023

Effect of transcutaneous spinal direct current stimulation on spasticity in upper motor neuron conditions: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Auwal B Hassan, Abubakar T Salihu, Mamman A Masta, Hilary Gunn, Jonathan Marsden, Auwal Abdullahi, Rufa'i Y Ahmad, Musa S Danazumi

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Spinal cord, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 26% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.

Auwal B HassanDepartment of Medical Rehabilitation (Physiotherapy), Faculty of Allied Health Sciences, College of Medical Sciences, University of Maiduguri, Maiduguri, Borno State, Nigeria.
Abubakar T SalihuDepartment of Physiotherapy, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Mamman A MastaDepartment of Medical Rehabilitation (Physiotherapy), Faculty of Allied Health Sciences, College of Medical Sciences, University of Maiduguri, Maiduguri, Borno State, Nigeria.
Hilary GunnPeninsula Allied Health Centre, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, UK.
Jonathan MarsdenPeninsula Allied Health Centre, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, UK.
Auwal AbdullahiDepartment of Physiotherapy, Bayero University Kano, Kano, Nigeria.
Rufa'i Y AhmadDepartment of Physiotherapy, Bayero University Kano, Kano, Nigeria.
Musa S DanazumiDiscipline of Physiotherapy, School of Allied Health, Human Services and Sport, College of Sciences, Health and Engineering, La Trobe University, Bundoora, VIC, 3085, Australia. M.Danazumi@latrobe.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3084-5552
Bayero University Kano · NGUniversity of Maiduguri · NGUniversity of Plymouth · GBLa Trobe University · AUMonash University · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

STUDY

designA systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical trials.

objectivesTo determine the effect of non-invasive transcutaneous spinal direct current stimulation (tsDCS) on spasticity, activity limitations and participation restrictions in various upper motor neuron diseases.

methodsSix databases including CINAHL plus, Cochrane CENTRAL, Embase, MEDLINE, SCOPUS and Web of Science were searched for the relevant records from January 2008 to December 2022. Two reviewers independently selected and extracted data on spasticity, activity limitations and participation restrictions. The risk of bias was evaluated using the PEDro scale while the GRADE approach established the certainty of the evidence.

resultsEleven studies were identified of which 5 (45.5%) were rated as having a low risk of bias and 8 (72.7%) were meta-analyzed. The meta-analyses did not show any significant differences between cathodal (SMD = -0.67, 95% CI = -1.50 to 0.15, P = 0.11, I

conclusionsThe meta-analysis of the available evidence provides an uncertain estimate of the effect of cathodal tsDCS on spasticity, activity limitation and participation restriction. It might be very helpful, or it may make no difference at all. However, considering the level of the evidence and the limitation in the quality of the majority of the included studies, further well-designed research may likely change the estimate of effect.

trial registrationPROSPERO CRD42021245601.

Indexed as

Spinal Cord InjuriesBiasHumansMotor NeuronsMuscle SpasticityPain Management

Identifiers

PMID37640926
OpenAlexW4386212196

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.