Trial reportBrain and behavior2025
Real-World Effects of Home-Based Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation in Depression: A Randomized Controlled Trial of 3-Week Versus 6-Week Protocols.
Trial report in Brain and behavior, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05539131 (Demonstration Study of the Effect of the Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation), which is not on this map. Cited by 4 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.
Demonstration Study of the Effect of the Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) for the Patients With Depression in Clinical Fields
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Identifying treatment response classes to transcranial direct current stimulation from daily ecological momentary assessment patterns in patients with depression.The international journal of neuropsychopharmacology · 2026Trial
- Real-World Effects of Home-Based Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation in Depression: A Randomized Controlled Trial of 3-Week Versus 6-Week Protocols.Brain and behavior · 2025Trial
- Baseline amyloid burden and global cognitive change during a home-based tDCS protocol in late-life depression: an exploratory single-arm study.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Article
- Home-Based Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation for Depression: From Feasibility to Clinical Implementation.Neuropsychiatric disease and treatment · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDespite growing interest in home-based transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) as a scalable treatment for depression, real-world evidence regarding its effectiveness, cognitive impact, and safety remains limited. Moreover, the optimal stimulation duration for home-based tDCS has not been clearly established. This study aimed to compare the clinical effects of two home-based tDCS protocols-one with 3 weeks of active stimulation followed by 3 weeks of sham stimulation (3WA) and another with 6 weeks of active stimulation (6WA)-in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD).
methodsIn this randomized controlled trial, participants diagnosed with MDD were assigned to either the 3WA or 6WA group. Depressive symptoms were measured using the Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI) and the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS). Cognitive function was assessed with the Digit Symbol Substitution Test (DSST). Adverse events were systematically monitored, and the relationship between psychotropic medication use and adverse event frequency was analyzed using logistic regression.
resultsBoth groups showed significant improvements in depressive symptoms and cognitive performance across four assessment points (baseline, Weeks 3, 6, and 12). Linear mixed-effects models revealed a significant main effect of time for both BDI (F = 33.67, p < 0.001) and MADRS scores (F = 34.50, p < 0.001), with no significant group-by-time interaction, indicating comparable efficacy between protocols. Model-derived mean changes from baseline to Week 12 were -7.53 (95% CI -9.85 to -5.21) for BDI and -6.61 (95% CI -8.73 to -4.49) for MADRS. DSST scores also improved significantly over time (F = 55.8, p < 0.001), with a mean increase of +6.62 points (95% CI +5.17 to +8.05), again showing no significant group difference. Regarding safety, non-medicated participants reported fewer adverse events, whereas those taking tianeptine experienced significantly more side effects compared with other medication groups.
conclusionsBoth 3-week and 6-week active tDCS protocols were associated with improvements in depressive symptoms and cognitive function over time in this naturalistic clinical context; however, as the study did not include a sham control, these changes should be interpreted as comparative rather than causal effects. The 3- and 6-week protocols demonstrated similar therapeutic outcomes, suggesting that shorter courses may be sufficient. These findings support the real-world applicability of at-home tDCS and highlight the need to consider concurrent pharmacotherapy when evaluating tolerability and safety.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05539131.
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.