ArticleFrontiers in neurology2025
Comparative effects of 2 Hz vs. 100 Hz transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation on upper limb motor function post-stroke: design and rationale for a randomized trial.
Article in Frontiers in neurology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Stroke-induced upper limb dysfunction significantly impacts rehabilitation outcomes. Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation (TENS) shows promise, but the optimal frequency for motor recovery remains unclear. This study investigates the comparative effects of low-frequency (2 Hz) and high-frequency (100 Hz) TENS in post-stroke upper limb rehabilitation. This article describes the design and conduct of this trial. Method/design: An assessor-blinded, single-center randomized controlled trial with partial participant blinding (active vs. placebo) will recruit 156 participants aged 40-80 years, 10 days to 2 months post-stroke, with mild-to-moderate upper-limb impairment (Brunnstrom III-V). Participants will be randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) to 2 Hz TENS, 100 Hz TENS, placebo TENS, or a no-TENS usual-care control for 8 weeks (3 sessions/week, 30 minutes/session). The primary outcome is the Fugl-Meyer Assessment of the Upper Extremity (FMA-UE). Secondary outcomes include Manual Muscle Testing (MMT), the Modified Ashworth Scale, electroencephalography (EEG) metrics, the Lindmark Motor Score (hand subscale), and the Barthel Index, assessed at baseline, weeks 4 and 8, and at 1 and 3 months post-intervention. Discussion: This trial is, to our knowledge, among the first randomized head-to-head comparisons of low- vs. high-frequency TENS for post-stroke upper-limb rehabilitation. Its findings are expected to clarify frequency-dependent effects, narrow the plausible range of effective parameters, and provide evidence to inform clinical guidelines and future rehabilitation strategies.
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.