Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38419713›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in neurology2024

The effects of occipital and parietal tDCS on chronic visual field defects after brain injury.

Lorenzo Diana, Carlotta Casati, Lisa Melzi, Stefania Bianchi Marzoli, Nadia Bolognini

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in neurology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. 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.

Lorenzo DianaLaboratory of Neuropsychology, Department of Neurorehabilitation Sciences, IRCCS Istituto Auxologico Italiano, Milan, Italy.
Carlotta CasatiLaboratory of Neuropsychology, Department of Neurorehabilitation Sciences, IRCCS Istituto Auxologico Italiano, Milan, Italy.
Lisa MelziNeuro-Ophthalmology Center and Ocular Electrophysiology Laboratory, IRCCS Istituto Auxologico Italiano, Milan, Italy.
Stefania Bianchi MarzoliNeuro-Ophthalmology Center and Ocular Electrophysiology Laboratory, IRCCS Istituto Auxologico Italiano, Milan, Italy.
Nadia BologniniLaboratory of Neuropsychology, Department of Neurorehabilitation Sciences, IRCCS Istituto Auxologico Italiano, Milan, Italy.
IRCCS Istituto Auxologico Italiano · ITUniversity of Milano-Bicocca · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Homonymous visual field defects (HVFDs) following acquired brain lesions affect independent living by hampering several activities of everyday life. Available treatments are intensive and week- or month-long. Transcranial Direct current stimulation (tDCS), a plasticity-modulating non-invasive brain stimulation technique, could be combined with behavioral trainings to boost their efficacy or reduce treatment duration. Some promising attempts have been made pairing occipital tDCS with visual restitution training, however less is knows about which area/network should be best stimulated in association with compensatory approaches, aimed at improving exploratory abilities, such as multisensory trainings. Methods: In a proof-of-principle, sham-controlled, single-blind study, 15 participants with chronic HVFDs underwent four one-shot sessions of active or sham anodal tDCS applied over the ipsilesional occipital cortex, the ipsilesional or contralesional posterior parietal cortex. tDCS was delivered during a compensatory multisensory (audiovisual) training. Before and immediately after each tDCS session, participants carried out a visual detection task, and two visual search tasks (EF and Triangles search tests). Accuracy (ACC) and response times (RTs) were analyzed with generalized mixed models. We investigated differences in baseline performance, clinical-demographic and lesion factors between tDCS responders and non-responders, based on post-tDCS behavioral improvements. Lastly, we conducted exploratory analyses to compare left and right brain-damaged participants. Results: RTs improved after active ipsilesional occipital and parietal tDCS in the visual search tasks, while no changes in ACC were detected. Responders to ipsilesional occipital tDCS (Triangle task) had shorter disease duration and smaller lesions of the parietal cortex and the superior longitudinal fasciculus. On the other end, on the EF test, those participants with larger damage of the temporo-parietal cortex or the fronto-occipital white matter tracts showed a larger benefit from contralesional parietal tDCS. Overall, the visual search RTs improvements were larger in participants with right-sided hemispheric lesions. Conclusion: The present result shows the facilitatory effects of occipital and parietal tDCS combined with compensatory multisensory training on visual field exploration in HVFDs, suggesting a potential for the development of new neuromodulation treatments to improve visual scanning behavior in brain-injured patients.

Indexed as

compensatory traininghemianopiamultisensory trainingtDCStranscranial direct current stimulationvisual field defects

Identifiers

PMID38419713
PMCPMC10899507
OpenAlexW4391818568

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.