ArticleClinical neurophysiology practice2025
Efficacy of cerebellar cathodal transcranial direct current stimulation for post-stroke aphasia: A randomized controlled trial.
Article in Clinical neurophysiology practice, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Probing the linguistic cerebellum: a qualitative review of the effects of cerebellar neurostimulation on language processing.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Pooled it
- Neuromodulation for post-stroke aphasia rehabilitation: established cortical stimulation and emerging network-based targets.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2026Review
- Dynamic functional reorganization in post-stroke aphasia: a state-of-the-art fMRI review from disease evolution to intervention.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2026Review
- Beyond behavior: a neurocognitive agenda for investigating the neural underpinnings of successful high-technology augmentative and alternative communication in adults.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Growing evidence highlights the cerebellum, particularly the right posterior lobule, in advanced language processes such as fluency, syntax, and phonological memory. However, its specific role in post-stroke aphasia recovery-especially its modulation of cortical networks and functional connectivity (FC)-remains unclear, which limits targeted intreventions. Methods: Sixteen post-stroke aphasia patients were randomized to receive either cerebellar transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) with speech therapy or sham stimulation with therapy. Language performance was assessed via the Chinese Standard Aphasia Scale (CRRCAE), and brain activation was monitored using functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS). Results: Both groups showed significant CRRCAE score improvements post-treatment (P < 0.05), without between-group differences (P > 0.05). FC reductions were noted across several interhemispheric and right-hemispheric pathways, while increased FC was observed in left hemisphere language-related areas. Conclusion: After baseline adjustment, the intervention group showed superior gains. Cerebellar tDCS modulates FC, suggesting a potential mechanism for enhancing aphasia recovery. Significance: Findings support the cerebellum as a promising neuromodulation target for post-stroke aphasia treatment.
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.