Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41750154›Full record

ReviewBrain sciences2026

Transcranial Alternating Current Stimulation for Pain: Mixed Evidence and the Path to Precision Neuromodulation.

Yaser Fathi, Amin Dehghani, David M Gantz, Giulia Liberati, Tor D Wager

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Brain sciences, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Yaser FathiInstitute of Neuroscience, Université Catholique de Louvain, 1200 Brussels, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-1320-1325
Amin DehghaniDepartment of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH 03755, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-5638-3624
David M GantzDepartment of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH 03755, USA.ORCID 0009-0007-5622-7086
Giulia LiberatiInstitute of Neuroscience, Université Catholique de Louvain, 1200 Brussels, Belgium.
Tor D WagerDepartment of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH 03755, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Neural oscillations are fundamental to the integration of sensory, affective, and cognitive processes that contribute to pain perception. Transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS) provides a valuable tool for investigating and modulating these oscillatory dynamics. In this review, we examine the effects of tACS on pain perception and pain-related oscillations in both healthy participants and individuals with chronic pain, highlighting methodological variability and mechanistic uncertainties that may contribute to mixed findings. We identified 14 studies, including 9 studies of experimental pain in healthy individuals and 5 of clinical pain disorders, comparing tACS to sham. Somatosensory alpha was the most frequently targeted oscillatory feature. Results varied considerably. Several studies reported reductions in pain, increases in alpha power, or changes in sensorimotor and prefrontal connectivity, but others showed no meaningful neural or behavioral effects. Out of the 14 studies, 6 demonstrated analgesic benefits and 2 showed improvements only under specific conditions or within subgroups, for a total of 8/14 studies with positive findings. Possible sources of heterogeneity include variation in stimulation duration, electrode montage, frequency alignment with individual rhythms, contextual state, and anatomical and neurophysiological differences across individuals. Pre-registered studies with sufficient power are needed to replicate effects within the most promising intervention protocols to establish a foundation in the field. We also recommend inclusion of brain imaging or electrophysiological recordings to verify whether stimulation effectively modulates the targeted neural oscillations. Finally, recent methodological advances, including phase-specific tACS, amplitude-modulated tACS, and individualized electric-field modeling, offer new opportunities to enhance mechanistic precision and clinical applicability. We argue that by integrating these approaches, future research can move beyond fixed, one-size-fits-all protocols toward personalized, state-dependent, closed-loop tACS approaches. Exploring these frontiers will transform tACS from an exploratory tool into a reliable intervention for pain.

Indexed as

alpha powerbrain imagingchronic painelectrophysiological recordingsexperimental painneural oscillationspain perceptiontACS

Identifiers

PMID41750154
PMCPMC12938538

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.