Trial reportJournal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation2026
The recovery of lower limb function in stroke patients: which sequence of transcranial direct current stimulation combined with lower limb rehabilitation robot is most effective-A randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
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
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed to directly compare the effects of synchronous versus sequential tDCS combined with RAGT on lower limb motor function, balance, and walking ability in stroke patients with hemiplegia through a randomized controlled trial.
methodsThis study was designed as a prospective, single-blind, randomized controlled trial. A total of 60 eligible stroke patients with hemiplegia were recruited and randomly assigned to three groups, with 20 patients in each group. The synchronous group received anodal tDCS stimulation concurrently during lower-limb robotic-assisted gait training (RAGT). The sequential group received tDCS stimulation first, followed immediately by RAGT. The sham stimulation group received sham tDCS stimulation during RAGT. All groups also received conventional rehabilitation training. The intervention was administered five days per week for four weeks. The primary outcome measure was the Fugl-Meyer Assessment of Lower Extremity (FMA-LE) score. Secondary outcome measures included the Berg Balance Scale (BBS) and the Functional Ambulation Category (FAC). All assessments were conducted at baseline (T0), after two weeks of intervention (T1), and after four weeks of intervention (T2) by assessors blinded to group allocation.
resultsData analysis of the 54 study completers showed that repeated measures ANOVA indicated significant main effects of time, group, and time × group interactions for both FMA-LE and BBS scores (p < 0.001). Simple effects analysis revealed that at T1, the synchronous group had significantly higher scores than the sequential group (FMA-LE p = 0.002; BBS p = 0.006) and the sham stimulation group (p < 0.001). By T2, the synchronous group’s scores were significantly better than those of the sequential group (p < 0.001), while the sequential group also significantly outperformed the sham stimulation group (p < 0.001). Generalized estimating equations analysis showed that the group, time, and interaction effects for FAC were all significant (p < 0.01), with the synchronous group having the highest cumulative odds ratio (47.893), significantly better than the sequential group (18.379) and the sham stimulation group.
conclusionThe combination of tDCS and lower limb robotic-assisted gait training effectively improves lower limb function in stroke patients, and the timing of combination significantly influences the treatment outcome. Specifically, the synchronous combination mode demonstrates faster and greater improvements in lower limb motor function, balance, and walking ability, significantly outperforming the sequential mode, making it a superior “brain-limb collaborative” rehabilitation strategy. Trial registration This study was preregistered with the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (Registration number: ChiCTR2400086567).
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.