Trial reportBMC psychiatry2026
Anodal tDCS over right DLPFC does not improve visuospatial working memory in schizophrenia: a single-session, sham-controlled study.
Trial report in BMC psychiatry, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03872310 (A Study of Cognitive Enhancement of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on Working Memory in Patients With Schizophrenia), which is not on this 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.
A Study of Cognitive Enhancement of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on Working Memory in Patients With Schizophrenia
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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCognitive deficits, particularly in working memory (WM), significantly impair functional outcomes in schizophrenia (SCZ). Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has shown potential for cognitive enhancement, but its efficacy remains inconsistent. We aimed to evaluate the acute effects of a single-session anodal tDCS over the right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (rDLPFC) on visuospatial and verbal WM, specifically examining whether baseline performance levels modulate treatment response.
methodsIn this sham-controlled, within-subject crossover study, 27 clinically stable SCZ patients received 15 min of 1.5 mA anodal tDCS or sham stimulation. WM was assessed pre- and post-stimulation using computerized Corsi Block-Tapping Tasks (CBT) and the Forward Digit Span. Participants were stratified into high- and low-performance subgroups via a median split of baseline CBT scores to investigate baseline-dependent effects.
resultsTwo-way repeated-measures Analyses of Variance (ANOVA) revealed no significant Session × Time interactions for the majority of WM tasks. A significant two-way interaction was identified for the CBT Backward span [F(1, 26) = 6.011, p = 0.021]; however, post-hoc analysis indicated no significant pre-to-post changes within either the anodal or sham condition. To address potential baseline-dependent effects with greater statistical precision, linear mixed-effects models (LMM) were employed using baseline performance as a continuous moderator. The LMM analysis revealed no significant three-way interactions (Session × Time × Baseline score) across all WM tasks (all p > 0.113), failing to support the hypothesis that initial cognitive capacity significantly moderates the acute response to stimulation.
conclusionsA single session of 1.5 mA anodal tDCS (15 min) over the rDLPFC did not significantly enhance visuospatial or verbal WM performance as measured by offline assessments in clinically stable patients with SCZ, regardless of their baseline cognitive capacity. While our sample size was powered to detect large effects, these null findings suggest that single-target, single-session protocols may be insufficient for acute cognitive enhancement in this population. The results highlight the need to consider the complex pathophysiology of SCZ and suggest that future research should explore multi-session interventions or distributed network-based stimulation.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03872310). Registered on May 1, 2019.
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.