ArticleFrontiers in neurology2025
Effects of cerebellar transcranial direct current stimulation on improving post-stroke upper extremity motor function: a protocol for a randomized controlled clinical trial.
Article in Frontiers in neurology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Upper extremity motor impairment is a prevalent and disabling consequence of stroke. While conventional rehabilitation improves function, recovery often plateaus. Cerebellar transcranial direct current stimulation (c-tDCS) presents a promising neuromodulatory adjunct by targeting cerebellar involvement in motor coordination, timing, and learning. However, robust evidence from well-designed randomized controlled trials (RCTs) is needed to establish its efficacy in enhancing post-stroke upper limb recovery. Objective: This RCT protocol aims to evaluate the efficacy of anodal c-tDCS applied sequentially with conventional upper limb rehabilitation (CULR), compared to sham stimulation plus the same rehabilitation, on improving motor function of the paretic upper extremity in subacute/chronic stroke patients. Methods: A double-blind, randomized, sham-controlled trial will be conducted. Fourty-eight participants with unilateral stroke and moderate to severe upper limb motor impairment will be randomized to either active or sham group. Anodal tDCS will be conducted to the ipsilesional cerebellar hemisphere in the active group, while sham delivery will be performed in the sham group. Both groups receive CULR after each c-tDCS session. Multimodal assessments will be administered pre- and post-intervention, comprising: Fugl-Meyer assessment upper extremity (FMA-UE) for motor impairment quantification, functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) capturing resting-state and c-tDCS-induced cortical hemodynamic responses and transcranial magnetic stimulation-derived motor evoked potentials (TMS-MEPs) evaluating cortical excitability. Conclusion: This rigorously designed RCT will provide high-level evidence on the therapeutic potential of c-tDCS as an adjunct to rehabilitation for improving upper limb motor function post-stroke. Findings will inform clinical practice regarding novel neuromodulation strategies to augment recovery. Clinical trial registration: https://www.chictr.org.cn, identifier ChiCTR2500101094.
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.