Trial reportScientific reports2026
Repeated tDCS of the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex for acute DoC: a pilot randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study aimed to investigate the safety and feasibility of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) in patients with acute disorders of consciousness (DoC), and to preliminarily explore its potential intervention effects. In this sham-controlled randomized trial, participants with acute DoC within 7-28 days post-onset were randomly assigned (1:1) to either the active or sham stimulation group. The active-stimulation group received 2-mA direct current stimulation at the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) for 20 min per session, twice daily, over 10 consecutive working days. Primary outcomes were safety and feasibility. Exploratory efficacy outcomes included the Coma Recovery Scale-Revised (CRS-R), Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS), and Full Outline of UnResponsiveness (FOUR) scale, assessed at baseline, after 5 days, and upon completion of the intervention. Between May 2022 and May 2023, 22 eligible patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to the active (n = 11) or sham (n = 11) group. All participants completed the full protocol without dropouts. No severe adverse events were reported; transient skin redness occurred in six patients (54.55%) in the active-stimulation group. After 10 days, the active-stimulation group showed significantly higher scores on exploratory neurobehavioral measures (CRS-R: 15.91 ± 6.56 vs. 7.64 ± 5.22, t = 3.27, p < 0.01; FOUR: 13.73 ± 2.97 vs. 9.36 ± 4.65, t = 2.62, p = 0.01). Compared with sham stimulation, the tDCS protocol demonstrated favorable safety and feasibility in patients with acute DoC, with preliminary signals of neurobehavioral improvement. These findings support the conduct of larger, adequately powered trials to confirm therapeutic efficacy.Trial registration This trial was prospectively registered in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (identifier: ChiCTR2200060209) on 22-05-22.
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.