Trial reportPain2026
Transcranial direct current stimulation of primary motor cortex reduces thermal pain.
Trial report in Pain, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Transcranial direct current stimulation for pain threshold in knee osteoarthritis: a mechanism-oriented systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Frontiers in physiology · 2026Pooled it
- Temporal Interference Stimulation of the Motor Cortex Produces Frequency-Dependent Analgesia.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Transcranial Alternating Current Stimulation for Pain: Mixed Evidence and the Path to Precision Neuromodulation.Brain sciences · 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
abstractTranscranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a noninvasive brain stimulation technique with growing potential for pain modulation. However, previous studies have often been limited by small sample sizes, limited outcome reliability, and blinding issues. Pre-registered randomized trials are needed to establish efficacy and reproducibility. Here, we report results from a pre-registered, triple-blind, randomized within-subject crossover trial (N = 50), investigating the effects of left motor cortex (M1) tDCS on experimentally evoked thermal pain in healthy adults. Participants underwent individualized pain calibration, then received anodal, cathodal, and sham M1-tDCS in counterbalanced order on separate visits 4 or more days apart. We assessed post-tDCS thermal pain, potential blinding, side effects, and reaction time during pain rating. Anodal tDCS significantly reduced pain compared with cathodal and sham stimulation ( P < 0.001, Cohen's d = 0.93 and 0.85, respectively; P < 0.001). Cathodal tDCS increased pain relative to sham (Cohen's d = 0.34, P < 0.01). These effects remained stable throughout the 35-minute post-tDCS pain testing period, with no evidence of decay over time. Blinding assessments confirmed that participants were unable to reliably identify the sham session. Anodal tDCS also modestly increased reaction time in the left (ipsilateral) hand ( P < 0.05, Cohen's d = 0.16), consistent with interhemispheric inhibition, which was uncorrelated with analgesia ( P > 0.10). This study provides strong evidence for reliable and polarity-dependent modulation of experimental pain by M1-tDCS.
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.