Trial reportBMC geriatrics2025
Network-based transcranial direct current stimulation may improve gait and cognitive function in older adults: a randomized controlled crossover study.
Trial report in BMC geriatrics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveGait abnormalities and cognition decline are significant challenges in aging, impacting the independence of older adults. Recent studies suggest that the dorsal attention network (DAN) and default network (DN) in the brain play crucial roles in modulating gait patterns and cognitive function. This study aimed to investigate whether concurrent transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) targeting DAN and DN could synergistically improve gait parameters and cognition among healthy older adults.
methodsIn this cross-over double-blind study, 28 healthy elderly aged 68.500 ± 4.647 years were randomized to receive tDCS or Sham stimulation, with electrode placement and current intensity optimised using the Stimweaver® technique. Immediately before and after stimulation, participants completed gait assessment under two conditions: walking at self-selected speed (single-task walking) and walking while counting backward (i.e., dual-task walking), as well as N-back (0-back and 1-back) tasks. Outcome measures included stride length, stride time, step width, gait speed in both single and dual-task walking, as well as dual-task cost to gait. Cognitive function outcomes encompassed accuracy, reaction time, and inverse efficiency scores (IES) in the 0-back and 1-back tasks.
resultsCompared to Sham stimulation, tDCS led to significant improvements in gait speed under both single-task and dual-task conditions, with average increases of 0.038 m/s and 0.053 m/s, respectively. Additionally, 1-back reaction time decreased by 57 ms and IES by 0.131 following tDCS, with no significant changes under Sham stimulation. However, no change in dual-task cost was observed. Moreover, improvements in working memory were associated with changes in gait speed in single-task walking. Blinding efficacy was excellent, and participants’ subjective belief in the type of stimulation received did not influence the observed functional benefits of tDCS.
conclusionIn healthy older adults, a single session of tDCS designed to modulate DAN and DN excitability concurrently improved gait speed in both single and dual-task walking, as well as working memory. These preliminary findings suggest that gait and working memory may be modifiable through neuromodulation approaches involving DAN and DN. Further studies are warranted to explore the relationship between gait, working memory, and these two brain networks using neuroimaging means.
trial registrationChiCTR2300077186-11/01/2023.
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.