ArticleImaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.)
Assessing adverse effects and unspecific effects of transcutaneous spinal direct current stimulation (tsDCS).
Article in Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.). 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.
- Low intensity transcranial electric stimulation: Safety, ethical, legal regulatory and application guidelines (2017-2025: An update) - endorsed by the European Society for Brain Stimulation (ESBS) and by the International Federation for Clinical Neurophysiology (IFCN).Clinical neurophysiology : official journal of the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2026Review
- No improvement in maximum jumping height in experienced and less experienced jumpers following a single session of transabdominal, transcutaneous spinal anodal direct current stimulation.Frontiers in physiology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Transcutaneous spinal direct current stimulation (tsDCS) is a relatively recent method for non-invasively modulating neural activity in the spinal cord. Despite its growing prominence, comprehensive studies addressing its potential adverse effects (AEs) and unspecific effects (UEs) are lacking. In this study, we conducted a systematic investigation of the potential AEs and UEs of tsDCS in healthy volunteers (N=20) who underwent a double-blind within-participant design, employing anodal, cathodal, and sham tsDCS of the thoracolumbar spinal cord. Our approach involved utilizing a newly developed structured questionnaire (to assess subjectively reported AEs) in combination with tsDCS-concurrent recording of skin conductance, cardiac and respiratory activity (to assess UEs in bodily state). The most frequent participant-reported AEs were sensations of burning, tingling, and itching, although they were largely described as mild; skin redness (experimenter-reported) occurred even more frequently. Importantly, when comparing AEs between active and sham tsDCS via frequentist and Bayesian analysis approaches, the results were largely in favour of no difference between conditions (with the exception of skin redness). A similar picture emerged for most UE metrics, suggesting that tsDCS does not induce changes in bodily state, at least as measured by our autonomic nervous system metrics. We believe that the strategy employed here could serve as a starting point for a systematic AE and UE assessment in clinical populations, longitudinal designs, and when targeting different spinal sites. Taken together, our results contribute to assessing the tolerability and specificity of tsDCS, in order to further the application of this spinal neuromodulation method in health and disease.
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.