Trial reportScientific reports2024
Practice improves older adults' attentional control and prospective memory more than HD-tDCS: a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
- No effect of anodal high-definition transcranial direct current stimulation during motor sequence learning in older people.GeroScience · 2026Trial
- A review on the reporting and assessment of adverse effects associated with high-definition transcranial direct current stimulation.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Frontal and parietal brain regions are involved in attentional control and prospective memory. It is debated, however, whether increased or decreased activity in those regions is beneficial for older adults' task performance. We therefore aimed to systematically modulate activity in those regions using high-definition transcranial direct current stimulation. We included n = 106 healthy adults (60-75 years old, 58% female) in a randomized, double-blind, and sham-controlled study. We evaluated task performance twice in the laboratory and at home and additionally assessed heart rates. Participants received cathodal, anodal, or sham stimulation of the left or right inferior frontal lobe, or the right superior parietal lobe (1 mA for 20 min). Performance improved at visit two in laboratory tasks but declined in at-home tasks. Stimulation did not modulate performance change in laboratory tasks but prevented decline in at home-tasks. Heart rates increased at visit two but only when right inferior frontal lobe activity was inhibited. Repeating a task seems more beneficial than stimulation for laboratory tasks. This might be different for at-home tasks. Inhibiting right frontal brain function increases heart rates, possibly due to a modulation of the frontal-vagal brain-heart axis.
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.