ArticleFrontiers in neurology2026
Optimized transcranial direct current stimulation for post-stroke dysphagia with small electrodes: a double-blind, randomized, feasibility study protocol.
Article in Frontiers in neurology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06305949 (A Multi-center, Randomized, Double-blind, Pilot Study to Evaluate the Safety and Efficacy of Optimized Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation for the Transitory Improvement of Swallowing Function in Patients With Post-stroke Dysphagia), which is not on this 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.
A Multi-center, Randomized, Double-blind, Pilot Study to Evaluate the Safety and Efficacy of Optimized Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation for the Transitory Improvement of Swallowing Function in Patients With Post-stroke Dysphagia
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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Rationale: Dysphagia affects approximately 78% of post-stroke patients. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has demonstrated potential for the treatment of this condition. However, its effectiveness is influenced by individual brain anatomical structure. Also, small-sized electrodes offer significant advantages over conventional larger electrodes by providing increased focality of the electrical field, allowing for precise targeting of cortical regions. Studies that consider both factors are necessary to understand the tDCS effects on this population. Aims: The present study aims to assess the safety and feasibility of using focalized, optimized tDCS electrode montages in post-stroke dysphagia while considering individual brain anatomy variables improve swallowing function. Method and sample size estimates: The present study is set to recruit 30 participants, who will be randomly assigned into an active or sham group. Both groups will utilize optimized tDCS electrode positions, determined through computer modeling based on individual magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Electrode positioning will be calculated to maximize the electric field (E-field) strength within the target region in the swallowing motor cortex, as designated by the investigator on the patient's MRI. The tDCS will be applied for 30 min at 2 mA for 20 sessions using sponge-coated disk electrodes (R = 1.5cm) designed to enhance focality. Study outcomes: The primary outcome measurements are the Functional Oral Intake Scale (FOIS) and the Penetration-aspiration Scale (PAS) together with various secondary outcomes, that include the Videofluoroscopic Dysphagia Scale (VDS) and other ancillary parameters that include voice quality and cough strength. Discussion: We hypothesize that the active tDCS group will demonstrate significant improvements in swallowing function compared to the sham group, establishing the feasibility of personalized, focal-electrode interventions for post-stroke dysphagia rehabilitation. Clinical trial registration: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT06305949, identifier: NCT06305949.
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.