SynthesisFrontiers in aging neuroscience2026
The therapeutic efficacy of transcranial direct current stimulation in managing Alzheimer's disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in aging neuroscience, 2026. 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.
- Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation in Anorexia Nervosa: A Randomized Sham-Controlled Trial.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The present study aimed to investigate the therapeutic efficacy of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) for Alzheimer's disease (AD) and identify potential influential factors. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library up to April 2025. Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in which tDCS was the sole differential intervention between study arms. The pooled effects of tDCS on patients' global cognition, language, memory, executive function, and emotion were evaluated. Subgroup analyses were also performed to identify potential influential factors. Results: A total of 23 studies involving 24 trials and 823 mild to moderate AD patients were included. Our meta-analysis showed that tDCS significantly improved global cognition in AD patients (standardized mean difference [SMD] = 0.66; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.38-0.95; Conclusion: tDCS treatment leads to improvements in global cognition, memory, and executive function in AD patients, but not in language or psychomotor symptoms. However, due to the relatively high heterogeneity of the included data, further well-designed studies are warranted before tDCS can be established as a standard therapeutic approach for AD.
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.