ReviewFrontiers in human neuroscience2024
Is non-invasive neuromodulation a viable technique to improve neuroplasticity in individuals with acquired brain injury? A review.
Review in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Neuroplasticity and recovery of the brain affected by substance use disorder: multilevel mechanisms and new therapeutic strategies (2020-2025).Frontiers in molecular neuroscience · 2026Pooled it
- The use of combined cognitive training and non-invasive brain stimulation to modulate impulsivity in adult populations: a systematic review and meta-analysis of existing studies.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2024Pooled it
- A comprehensive review on adaptive plasticity and recovery mechanisms post-acquired brain injury.Neuroprotection (Chichester, England) · 2025Review
- Smart Clothing and Medical Imaging Innovations for Real-Time Monitoring and Early Detection of Stroke: Bridging Technology and Patient Care.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Editorial: The role of neuromodulation techniques in facilitating motor recovery and brain plasticity: an integrative approach.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This study aimed to explore and evaluate the efficacy of non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) as a standalone or coupled intervention and understand its mechanisms to produce positive alterations in neuroplasticity and behavioral outcomes after acquired brain injury (ABI). Data sources: Cochrane Library, Web of Science, PubMed, and Google Scholar databases were searched from January 2013 to January 2024. Study selection: Using the PICO framework, transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) randomized controlled trials (RCTs), retrospective, pilot, open-label, and observational large group and single-participant case studies were included. Two authors reviewed articles according to pre-established inclusion criteria. Data extraction: Data related to participant and intervention characteristics, mechanisms of change, methods, and outcomes were extracted by two authors. The two authors performed quality assessments using SORT. Results: Twenty-two studies involving 657 participants diagnosed with ABIs were included. Two studies reported that NIBS was ineffective in producing positive alterations or behavioral outcomes. Twenty studies reported at least one, or a combination of, positively altered neuroplasticity and improved neuropsychological, neuropsychiatric, motor, or somatic symptoms. Twenty-eight current articles between 2020 and 2024 have been studied to elucidate potential mechanisms of change related to NIBS and other mediating or confounding variables. Discussion: tDCS and TMS may be efficacious as standalone interventions or coupled with neurorehabilitation therapies to positively alter maladaptive brain physiology and improve behavioral symptomology resulting from ABI. Based on postintervention and follow-up results, evidence suggests NIBS may offer a direct or mediatory contribution to improving behavioral outcomes post-ABI. Conclusion: More research is needed to better understand the extent of rTMS and tDCS application in affecting changes in symptoms after ABI.
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.