ReviewBrain & NeuroRehabilitation2024
A Literature Review on Optimal Stimulation Parameters of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation for Motor Recovery After Stroke.
Review in Brain & NeuroRehabilitation, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Emerging trends and research hotspots of non-invasive brain stimulation for stroke: a bibliometric and visualization study.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Pooled it
- Additive effect of tDCS and neuromotor recruitment on functional recovery in chronic paraplegia: A randomized controlled trial.PloS one · 2026Trial
- Trial
- Psychosocial Health Following Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation of Oculomotor Regions.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Comparative efficacy and mechanistic insights of non-invasive neuromodulation and motor rehabilitation on functional reorganization of the supplementary motor area in subacute stroke: a narrative review.Frontiers in physiology · 2026Review
- Non-invasive brain stimulation: current and future applications in neurology.Nature reviews. Neurology · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a non-invasive neuromodulatory technique with potential in stroke rehabilitation by modulating cortical excitability. However, the optimal parameters, including electrode placement, current intensity, stimulation duration, and electrode size, remain poorly understood, and the interactions among these factors contribute to mixed results in motor recovery post-stroke. This review explores the various stimulation parameters and their impact on enhancing corticospinal excitability (CSE) and motor function recovery. Different electrode placement (montages), such as anodal, cathodal, and bi-hemispheric stimulation, have demonstrated varying effectiveness in restoring motor function. Bihemispheric stimulation demonstrated a larger effect size compared to other unihemispheric (anodal or cathodal) stimulation; however, its relative superiority remains inconclusive. Inter-individual anatomical variations, such as skull thickness, lesion location, and cortical atrophy, can affect tDCS outcomes, highlighting the need for personalized electrode placement guided by computational modeling based on brain imaging. Furthermore, stimulation intensity, typically 1-2 mA, exhibited nonlinear effects on CSE, contrasting with the dose-response relationships observed in earlier studies. Stimulation duration is also critical, with evidence suggesting that prolonged stimulation may reverse excitability-enhancing effects beyond a certain threshold. While smaller electrodes enhance focality, an appropriately sized electrode is necessary to effectively modulate electrical activity in the target region, with evidence suggesting a dose-response relationship between electrode size and motor recovery. Overall, the interplay among these parameters underscores the need for personalized and optimized tDCS protocols to achieve consistent motor recovery in stroke patients. Future research should focus on refining these parameters to maximize the therapeutic benefits of tDCS.
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.