Trial reportMedical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research2025
tDCS and Speech Therapy in Aphasia Treatment: A Multicenter Comparative Study of Efficacy.
Trial report in Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Rehabilitation interventions for Wernicke's aphasia and related fluent aphasia: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2026Pooled it
- Effectiveness of non-pharmacological therapies for poststroke aphasia: a protocol of a systematic review and network meta-analysis.BMJ open · 2026Article
- Neuromodulation for post-stroke aphasia rehabilitation: established cortical stimulation and emerging network-based targets.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2026Review
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
BACKGROUND Aphasia is a common consequence of stroke and traumatic brain injury (TBI) that significantly impairs communication and quality of life. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has emerged as a non-invasive technique potentially enhancing language rehabilitation. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of tDCS in combination with speech-language therapy (SLT) in improving language functions in patients with aphasia. MATERIAL AND METHODS A group of 90 patients diagnosed with TBI- or stroke-related aphasia were randomly assigned to 3 groups: tDCS alone (Group I), SLT alone (Group II), and tDCS combined with SLT (Group III). Treatment procedures spanned 5 months. tDCS sessions lasted 30-40 minutes each (1-1.5 mA), targeting the left dorsolateral (F3) and the right (F4) prefrontal cortex. Language function was assessed using the Frenchay Aphasia Screening Test (FAST), Aphasia Evaluation Scale (SODA), and Token Test (TT). Statistical analyses compared pre- and post-intervention outcomes within and between groups. RESULTS All groups demonstrated significant improvements in language function (p < 0.001). Group III showed the greatest gains in verbal expression, comprehension, and reading (32.6% improvement in FAST scores), significantly outperforming Group I (24.3%) and Group II (17.8%). tDCS alone was more effective than SLT alone (p = 0.04). Combining tDCS with SLT resulted in superior patient-reported improvements in daily communication and confidence in verbal expression compared to either treatment alone. CONCLUSIONS Patients who received combined tDCS and SLT had notable improvements across all measured parameters, including verbal expression, comprehension, reading, and writing, as assessed by the FAST, SODA, and TT tests.
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.