SynthesisFrontiers in aging neuroscience2026
The different stimulation durations of transcranial direct current stimulation for Parkinson's disease: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in aging neuroscience, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) holds promise for the treatment of motor symptoms in Parkinson's disease (PD). However, the optimal stimulation duration within a single session remains unclear. Objective: This network meta-analysis (NMA) aimed to compare the relative effects of different single-session tDCS durations (13-30 min, 2 mA) on motor symptoms in patients with Parkinson's disease. Methods: We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science up to May 7, 2026 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared active anodal tDCS at 2 mA with sham stimulation in patients with PD. The primary outcome was the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale Part III (UPDRS-III), and the secondary outcome was the Timed Up and Go (TUG) test. Risk of bias was assessed using the ROB 2.0 tool, and the certainty of evidence was evaluated using the GRADE approach. A frequentist network meta-analysis was performed. Results: Sixteen RCTs (414 patients) were included. All networks were open-loop. Compared to sham, all active tDCS (2 mA, with durations of 13, 15, 20, 25, and 30 min) showed numerical improvements in UPDRS-III and TUG (0.35-1.03 s), but none reached statistical significance (all Conclusion: No single-session tDCS duration between 13 and 30 min at 2 mA was statistically superior to sham for improving motor function in PD. The current limited evidence suggests that varying stimulation time alone within this range does not decisively impact outcomes. Our findings highlight the need for multidimensional optimization of tDCS and further high-quality RCTs. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD42024599000.
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.