Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40524350›Full record

Trial reportPsychophysiology2025

Investigating the Effects of Anodal Transcranial Pulsed Current Stimulation at Low Frequencies (0.5 to 5 Hz) on Corticospinal and Corticocortical Excitability.

Mona Malekahmad, Ashlyn Frazer, Maryam Zoghi, Shapour Jaberzadeh

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Psychophysiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Trial
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

4 authors.

Mona MalekahmadMonash Neuromodulation Research Unit (MNRU), Department of Physiotherapy, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-1546-2817
Ashlyn FrazerMonash Neuromodulation Research Unit (MNRU), Department of Physiotherapy, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Maryam ZoghiDiscipline of Physiotherapy, Federation University, Ballarat, Victoria, Australia.
Shapour JaberzadehMonash Neuromodulation Research Unit (MNRU), Department of Physiotherapy, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-2957-4510

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The mechanism underlying transcranial pulsed current stimulation (tPCS) as a non-invasive neuromodulation technique has garnered considerable attention in recent years. However, the effects of anodal tPCS (a-tPCS) at low frequencies remain unexplored. This study aimed to investigate the a-tPCS effects at 0.5, 1, 3, and 5 Hz on cortical outcomes and its adverse side effects. This double-blinded, randomized, counterbalanced crossover trial included 18 healthy young participants who completed five experimental sessions with 2 mA of a-tPCS for 20 min in a randomized order of frequencies (0.5, 1, 3, and 5 Hz). Single-pulse and paired-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) on the left primary motor cortex (M1) was delivered before and immediately after the stimulation at rest. Sessions were spaced at least 48 h apart to minimize carry-over effects. The results indicated that a single session of a-tPCS at frequencies of 1, 3, and 5 Hz significantly (p < 0.05) enhanced corticospinal excitability (CSE), while 0.5 Hz decreased CSE compared to sham stimulation. The CSE changes at 1 and 5 Hz were associated with increased intracortical facilitation (ICF), with reduced adverse effects observed at higher frequencies. In contrast, the cortical effects of 0.5 Hz were linked to increased short intracortical inhibition (SICI) with minimal side effects. However, all frequencies except 0.5 Hz were associated with phosphenes or flashing lights during stimulation. Given the similar effects of a-tPCS with other pulsatile current stimulation, it is plausible that tPCS could serve as a complementary or superior alternative to TMS, particularly for at-risk and diverse patient populations. However, this claim needs further comparative studies before suggesting clinical superiority for epilepsy and neuro-rehabilitation. Furthermore, like other neuromodulation techniques, tPCS shows potential as an affordable, home-based treatment option. Further research is needed to establish the efficacy of tPCS relative to TMS methodologies through rigorous experimental testing.

Indexed as

Cortical ExcitabilityEvoked Potentials, MotorMotor CortexPyramidal TractsTranscranial Direct Current StimulationAdultCross-Over StudiesDouble-Blind MethodFemaleHumansMaleTranscranial Magnetic StimulationYoung Adultcorticocortical excitabilitycorticospinal excitabilitytPCS, low frequenciestranscranial magnetic stimulationtranscranial pulsed current stimulation

Identifiers

PMID40524350
PMCPMC12171088

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.