SynthesisScientific reports2025
Non-invasive brain stimulation contributing to postural control with and without stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effect of cerebellar vermis intermittent theta-burst stimulation on balance function in frail older adults: a randomized controlled trial.BMC geriatrics · 2026Trial
- Development trajectory of postural control in stroke patients with hemiplegia: a differential analysis of psycho-social adjustment.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Modern Technologies Supporting Motor Rehabilitation After Stroke: A Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Non-invasive brain stimulation techniques demonstrate promising potential for enhancing neural plasticity and motor recovery, yet their comparative effectiveness for improving postural control across neurologically impaired and intact populations requires systematic investigation. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the therapeutic efficacy of brain stimulation modalities on postural control, comparing outcomes between stroke survivors and neurologically intact adults through controlled trials. Systematic searches were conducted across major databases (CINAHL, Embase, MEDLINE, Web of Science) for randomized controlled trials and crossover studies published from 2014 to 2024. Study quality was assessed using the Risk of Bias 2 tool, with treatment effects analyzed through standardized mean differences in a random-effects model. Analysis of 15 studies revealed significant overall effects of brain stimulation (SMD = 0.79, 95% CI 0.47-1.11), with notably stronger responses in stroke participants (SMD = 0.95) versus neurologically intact individuals (SMD = 0.39). Transcranial direct current stimulation showed particular efficacy in stroke rehabilitation (SMD = 1.79), while intermittent theta burst stimulation demonstrated moderate effects (SMD = 0.68). Primary motor cortex stimulation yielded optimal outcomes (SMD = 1.21), followed by cerebellar (SMD = 0.75) and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex interventions (SMD = 0.35). These findings reveal differential response patterns between populations and stimulation parameters, suggesting enhanced neuroplastic potential in stroke survivors. This evidence supports the development of targeted neuromodulatory approaches for rehabilitation and performance enhancement.
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.