ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2024
Treating depression at home with transcranial direct current stimulation: a feasibility study.
Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 4 of them syntheses 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Remotely Supervised, Home-Based Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation for Major Depressive Disorder: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.JMIR mental health · 2026Pooled it
- Efficacy and safety of home-based transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) on patients with depressive disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.Scientific reports · 2025Pooled it
- Adjunctive transcranial direct current stimulation for cognitive improvement in schizophrenia: insights from a systematic review and exploratory meta-analysis.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2025Pooled it
- Challenges and future directions of transcranial direct current stimulation for depression: insights from a systematic review and meta-analysis.Revista brasileira de psiquiatria (Sao Paulo, Brazil : 1999) · 2025Pooled it
- 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
- Feasibility of home-based accelerated intermittent theta-burst stimulation (aiTBS) for depression: a case series.Frontiers in psychiatry · 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
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Treating major depressive disorder (MDD) with transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) devices at home has various logistic advantages compared to tDCS treatment in the clinic. However, preliminary (controlled) studies showed side effects such as skin lesions and difficulties in the implementation of home-based tDCS. Thus, more data are needed regarding the feasibility and possible disadvantages of home-based tDCS. Methods: Ten outpatients (23-69 years) with an acute depressive episode were included for this one-arm feasibility study testing home-based tDCS. All patients self-administered prefrontal tDCS (2 mA, 20 min, anodal left, cathodal right) at home on 30 consecutive working days supported by video consultations. Correct implementation of the home-based treatment was analyzed with tDCS recordings. Feasibility was examined by treatment compliance. For additional analyses of effectiveness, three depression scores were used: Hamilton depression rating scale (HDRS-21), Major Depression Inventory (MDI), and the subscale depression of the Depression-Anxiety-Stress Scale (DASS). Furthermore, usability was measured with the user experience questionnaire (UEQ). Tolerability was analyzed by the number of reported adverse events (AEs). Results: Eight patients did not stick to the protocol. AEs were minimal. Four patients responded to the home treatment according to the MDI. Usability was judged positive by the patients. Conclusions: Regular video consultations or other safety concepts are recommended regardless of the number of video sessions actually conducted. Home-based tDCS seems to be safe and handy in our feasibility study, warranting further investigation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.