Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38044393›Full record

SynthesisNeurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology2024

Efficacy of transcranial direct current stimulation in patients with dysphagia after stroke: a systematic review.

Giulia Isadora Cenci, Rebeka Bustamante Rocha, Fernanda Ferreira Bomtempo, Gabriela Borges Nager, Guilherme Diogo Silva, Eberval Gadelha Figueiredo, João Paulo Mota Telles

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology, 2024. 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
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
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

7 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Giulia Isadora CenciSchool of Medicine, Meridional Faculty, Passo Fundo, Brazil. giuliaisacenci@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4236-1096
Rebeka Bustamante RochaSchool of Medicine, Federal University of Amazonas, Manaus, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8689-5148
Fernanda Ferreira BomtempoSchool of Medicine, Medical Sciences Faculty of Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7268-6695
Gabriela Borges NagerSchool of Medicine, Federal University of the State of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0604-4154
Guilherme Diogo SilvaDepartment of Neurology, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9764-3763
Eberval Gadelha FigueiredoDivision of Neurosurgery, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9094-6622
João Paulo Mota TellesDepartment of Neurology, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9322-0405
Universidade de São Paulo · BRAtitus Educação · BRFaculdade de Ciências Médicas de Minas Gerais · BRUniversidade Federal do Amazonas · BRUniversidade Federal do Estado do Rio de Janeiro · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSwallowing is a complex function that can be disrupted after stroke. Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) is a non-invasive brain stimulation therapy that recently has been tested to treat stroke-related dysphagia.

methodsThe authors performed a search in the literature to review the described evidence of the use of tDCS in dysphagia after stroke. Three electronic databases were searched. The risk of bias evaluation was carried out through the RoB-2 tool. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) framework was also implemented.

resultsOf 265 articles, only nine studies were included in this review. The most common location of the tDCS stimulation was the unaffected hemisphere (44%). Regarding the outcome measure, the Dysphagia Outcome and Severity Scale (DOSS) was the most commonly used (55%). However, due to the high heterogeneity of the protocols, and considering the differences between the types of stroke, the authors opted not to perform a metanalysis. Instead, a systematic review with a thorough analysis of each individual study and the impact of the differences to the outcomes was preferred.

conclusionsThe final considerations are that even though the majority of studies described benefits from tDCS in post-stroke dysphagia, as they present too many methodological differences, it is not possible to compare them. In addition, many articles included patients with less than 6 months after stroke, which is an important bias as the swallowing function can be recovered spontaneously within this period, turning the certainty of the evidence really low.

Indexed as

Deglutition DisordersStrokeTranscranial Direct Current StimulationHumansStroke RehabilitationTreatment OutcomeDysphagiaShamStroketDCS

Identifiers

PMID38044393
OpenAlexW4389292514

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.