ArticlePhysiotherapy Canada. Physiotherapie Canada2025
Evaluating Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation as an Adjunct to In-Patient Physiotherapy in Paediatric Acquired Brain Injury: A Randomized Feasibility Trial.
Article in Physiotherapy Canada. Physiotherapie Canada, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Neuromodulations in Psychiatric Disorders: Emerging Lines of Definition.Psychotherapy and psychosomatics · 2025Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Evaluate the feasibility of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) as an adjunct to in-patient physiotherapy for children and youth with acquired brain injury (ABI). Method: This randomized feasibility trial allocated children (5-18 years of age with moderate to severe ABI) to receive either active or sham anodal tDCS immediately prior to 16 of their existing in-patient physiotherapy sessions. Participants, physiotherapists, assessors, and primary investigators were blinded to treatment allocation. Eligibility, recruitment, retention, tolerance, and preliminary treatment outcomes were evaluated against a priori feasibility targets. Results: Of 232 children admitted over 21 months, 6 were eligible (2.6%) and 4 were recruited (66.7%). One participant completed the entire study protocol, two were withdrawn for unrelated changes in medical stability, and one could not commence the study due to COVID-19 restrictions. Participants completed all tDCS sessions that were started with the primary transient side effect being sub-electrode itchiness. Conclusions: While the study was infeasible from eligibility and retention perspectives, study procedures (e.g., assessment, treatment, side effect tracking, physiotherapy documentation) were viable and should be applied to future paediatric tDCS studies.
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.