ArticleCerebellum (London, England)2026
Cerebellar Transcranial Alternating Current Stimulation: Frequency-Specific Modulation of Human Gait.
Article in Cerebellum (London, England), 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
Coordinated locomotion depends on rhythmic neural interactions, with the cerebellum contributing to movement timing and scaling. However, how cerebellar oscillatory dynamics influence human gait remains unclear, despite its relevance for motor learning and rehabilitation. We hypothesized two frequency-dependent effects: (i) gait-matched cerebellar transcranial alternating current stimulation (c-tACS) would produce stronger phase alignment than sham and selectively affect temporal rather than spatial gait parameters; and (ii) higher-frequency stimulation would preferentially modulate spatial gait parameters without consistent phase alignment with the ongoing locomotor rhythm. To test this, fifteen healthy adults received randomized bilateral c-tACS at their individual gait-cycle frequency (iGCF), iGCF ± 10% offsets, individual step frequency (iSF), a harmonic in alpha range (iGCF×10), 50 Hz (gamma), and sham. Head-mounted accelerometry recorded kinematics of continuous walking and a stop-and-go task. Phase synchrony between stimulation and gait periodicity was quantified using the debiased phase-locking value (dPLV). 50 Hz c-tACS increased gait velocity and stride length without altering cadence or stride time, indicating selective modulation of spatial gait parameters. In contrast, gait-matched stimulation (iGCF, iSF) produced strong stimulation-gait phase alignment but did not enhance temporal gait parameters beyond sham, arguing against entrainment-specific behavioral effects. dPLV declined with iGCF ± 10% during continuous walking, whereas a transient increase at iGCF-10% during stop-and-go was not specific to active stimulation. These findings support frequency-dependent effects of c-tACS on locomotion and refine the mechanistic understanding of how rhythmic cerebellar stimulation interacts with gait control, with potential implications for targeted neuromodulation.
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.