Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39507062›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in human neuroscience2024

The subjective experience of transcranial electrical stimulation: a within-subject comparison of tolerability and side effects between tDCS, tACS, and otDCS.

Jovana Bjekić, Marko Živanović, Marija Stanković, Dunja Paunović, Uroš Konstantinović, Saša R Filipović

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article 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 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. [A review of noninvasive brain-computer interfaces combined with transcranial electrical stimulation for neural rehabilitation].Sheng wu yi xue gong cheng xue za zhi = Journal of biomedical engineering = Shengwu yixue gongchengxue zazhi · 2026
    Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
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

6 authors.

Jovana Bjekić *Human Neuroscience Group, Centre for Neuroscience and Neuromodulation, Institute for Medical Research, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia.
Marko Živanović *Institute of Psychology, Department of Psychology, Faculty of Philosophy, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia.
Marija StankovićHuman Neuroscience Group, Centre for Neuroscience and Neuromodulation, Institute for Medical Research, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia.
Dunja PaunovićHuman Neuroscience Group, Centre for Neuroscience and Neuromodulation, Institute for Medical Research, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia.
Uroš KonstantinovićHuman Neuroscience Group, Centre for Neuroscience and Neuromodulation, Institute for Medical Research, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia.
Saša R FilipovićHuman Neuroscience Group, Centre for Neuroscience and Neuromodulation, Institute for Medical Research, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Low-intensity transcranial electrical stimulation (tES), including techniques like transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS), and oscillatory transcranial direct current stimulation (otDCS), has been widely explored for its neuromodulatory effects on motor, cognitive, and behavioral processes. Despite well-established safety, these techniques can induce varying degrees of discomfort and side effects, potentially impacting their application. This study presents a within-subject sham-controlled experiment directly comparing the subjective experience and side effects of tDCS, tACS, and otDCS. Participants reported their discomfort levels at multiple time points during 20-min stimulation sessions and completed a side-effects questionnaire before and after each session. Results indicated that the overall discomfort levels were low across all conditions, with ≥95% reporting the absence of discomfort or mild procedure-induced discomfort. Nevertheless, tDCS and otDCS were slightly less comfortable compared to sham, especially at the beginning of stimulation, with tACS-induced discomfort levels being overall comparable to sham. The most common side / adverse effects were mild skin sensations, including itching and tingling, particularly with tDCS and otDCS, while tACS occasionally caused phosphenes and blurred vision. These findings provide a systematic comparison of tES-induced discomfort and side effects between different tES techniques, highlighting the high safety of tES, but also the importance of considering within- and between-person variability and time-course effects in tES applications.

Indexed as

oscillatory transcranial direct current stimulation (otDCS)safetyside effectssubjective experiencetolerabilitytranscranial alternating current stimulation (tACS)transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS)transcranial electrical stimulation (TES)

Identifiers

PMID39507062
PMCPMC11537871

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.