Trial reportFrontiers in neurology
Comparative effects of transcranial direct and alternating current stimulation combined with cognitive-motor dual-task training on functional and cognitive recovery in stroke survivors.
Trial report in Frontiers in neurology. 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
Aim: This study aimed to determine whether dual-target anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) or transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS) applied over the primary motor cortex (M1) and left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC), when combined with cognitive-motor dual-task training (CMDT), could enhance cognitive, physical, and mood outcomes in stroke survivors. Methods: A single-blind, three-arm randomized controlled trial was conducted involving 72 stroke survivors. Participants were randomized to receive 15 sessions of dual-site (M1 + DLPFC) anodal tDCS, tACS, or sham stimulation, all administered concurrently with CMDT. Primary outcomes included cognitive performance (Visual Cognitive Assessment Test, VCAT) and physical function (Fugl-Meyer Lower Limb, FMA-LE). Secondary outcomes comprised the Trail-Making Test (TMT-A/B), Berg Balance Scale (BBS), Timed Up and Go (TUG) under single and dual-task conditions, and the Hamilton Depression Scale (HAMD). Data were analyzed using ANOVA with Bonferroni-adjusted pairwise comparisons. Results: Significant group × time interactions were observed across multiple functional domains. The tDCS + CMDT group showed superior improvements in FMA-LE scores vs. both tACS + CMDT and sham + CMDT (post-hoc Conclusion: Dual-site anodal tDCS and tACS combined with CMDT represent safe and effective neuromodulatory strategies for stroke rehabilitation. While tDCS confers greater benefits in promoting local motor plasticity and global cognitive gains, tACS achieves functionally equivalent improvements in network-dependent tasks such as dual-task performance and mood regulation. Significance: These findings provide novel, evidence-based guidance for tailoring non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) modalities to specific neurorehabilitation goals, highlighting that combining tDCS or tACS with CMDT can enhance neuroplasticity and translate into meaningful functional recovery in stroke survivors. Clinical trial registration: Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR2400092849).
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.