Trial reportPeerJ2024
Anodal transcranial direct current stimulation enhances response inhibition and attention allocation in fencers.
Trial report in PeerJ, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Effects of single-session anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) on cognitive and motor performance in athletes and healthy adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Scientific reports · 2026Pooled it
- Meta-analysis of the acute effects of anodal transcranial direct current stimulation on athletic performance.Frontiers in physiology · 2025Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: The aim of this study is to investigate the acute effects of anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) on reaction time, response inhibition and attention in fencers. Methods: Sixteen professional female fencers were recruited, and subjected to anodal tDCS and sham stimulation in the primary motor area (M1) one week apart in a randomized, crossover, single-blind design. A two-factor analysis of variance with repeated measures was used to analyze the effects of stimulation conditions (anodal stimulation, sham stimulation) and time (pre-stimulation, post-stimulation) on reaction time, response inhibition, and attention in fencers. Results: The study found a significant improvement in response inhibition and attention allocation from pre-stimulation to post-stimulation following anodal tDCS but not after sham stimulation. There was no statistically significant improvement in reaction time and selective attention. Conclusions: A single session of anodal tDCS could improve response inhibition, attention allocation in female fencers. This shows that tDCS has potential to improve aspects of an athlete's cognitive performance, although we do not know if such improvements would transfer to improved performance in competition. However, more studies involving all genders, large samples, and different sports groups are needed in the future to further validate the effect of tDCS in improving the cognitive performance of athletes.
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.