{"doi":"10.1177/02692155241235336","title":"Transcranial direct current stimulation for upper extremity motor dysfunction in poststroke patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis","abstract":"<jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Objective</jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>To evaluate the efficacy and safety of transcranial direct current stimulation in poststroke patients with upper extremity motor dysfunction using a systematic review and meta-analysis.</jats:p>\n                  </jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Data Sources</jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>We searched the Web of Science, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and PubMed for randomized controlled trials investigating the effects of both active and sham stimulation up until January 27, 2024.</jats:p>\n                  </jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Review Methods</jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>Efficacy, including the upper extremity Fugl–Meyer Assessment, Action Research Arm Test, Barthel Index, and safety, were assessed. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool and the Physiotherapy Evidence Database Scale. Meta-analysis was performed using the RevMan 5.4 software.</jats:p>\n                  </jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Results</jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>\n                      Forty-four studies with 1555 participants were included. Transcranial direct current stimulation proved effective in improving upper extremity motor function (standardized mean difference = 0.22, 95% confidence interval: 0.12–0.32, P &lt; 0.001) and Barthel Index (mean difference = 4.65, 95% confidence interval: 2.82–6.49, P &lt; 0.001). Subgroup analysis revealed the highest transcranial direct current stimulation efficacy in patients with subacute stroke. Both anodal and cathodal stimulation were effective against upper extremity motor dysfunction. C3/C4 was the most effective stimulus target. Optimal stimulation parameters included stimulus current densities &lt;0.057 mA/cm\n                      <jats:sup>2</jats:sup>\n                      for 20–30 min and &lt;30 sessions. Adverse effects and dropouts during follow-up showed that transcranial direct current stimulation is safe and feasible.\n                    </jats:p>\n                  </jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Conclusions</jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>Our findings suggest that both anodal and cathodal stimulation were significantly effective in subacute stroke patients, particularly when preceding other treatments and when C3/C4 is targeted.</jats:p>\n                  </jats:sec>","journal":"Clinical Rehabilitation","year":2024,"id":674148,"datarank":0.37273599746820013,"base_score":2.4849066497880004,"endowment":2.4849066497880004,"self_citation_contribution":0.37273599746820013,"citation_network_contribution":0.0,"self_endowment_contribution":0.37273599746820013,"citer_contribution":0.0,"corpus_percentile":null,"corpus_rank":null,"citation_count":11,"citer_count":0,"citers_with_citation_signal":0,"citers_with_endowment":0,"datacite_reuse_total":0,"is_dataset":false,"is_dataset_confidence":null,"is_data_producer":false,"deposit_databanks":null,"is_oa":false,"file_count":0,"downloads":0,"has_version_chain":false,"published_date":null,"fair_score":null,"fair_percentile":null,"algorithm_id":"datarank_citation_only_1hop_v6","ranking_scope":"data_only","authors":[{"id":1058306,"name":"Nan Zhang","orcid":"0000-0001-7849-3974","position":1,"is_corresponding":false},{"id":284823,"name":"Zhiyuan Shen","orcid":"0000-0003-2834-0309","position":2,"is_corresponding":false},{"id":529989,"name":"Xin Guo","orcid":"0000-0001-9756-1581","position":3,"is_corresponding":false},{"id":1563263,"name":"Jun Xing","orcid":null,"position":4,"is_corresponding":false},{"id":1736040,"name":"Shujuan Tian","orcid":"0009-0000-4160-5231","position":5,"is_corresponding":false},{"id":422340,"name":"Yuan Xing","orcid":"0000-0002-1596-1862","position":6,"is_corresponding":false},{"id":245742,"name":"Xian Tang","orcid":"0000-0003-0235-995X","position":0,"is_corresponding":false}],"reference_count":0,"raw_metadata":{"has_enrichment":true,"resolved":true,"title":"Transcranial direct current stimulation for upper extremity motor dysfunction in poststroke patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis","abstract":"<jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Objective</jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>To evaluate the efficacy and safety of transcranial direct current stimulation in poststroke patients with upper extremity motor dysfunction using a systematic review and meta-analysis.</jats:p>\n                  </jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Data Sources</jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>We searched the Web of Science, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and PubMed for randomized controlled trials investigating the effects of both active and sham stimulation up until January 27, 2024.</jats:p>\n                  </jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Review Methods</jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>Efficacy, including the upper extremity Fugl–Meyer Assessment, Action Research Arm Test, Barthel Index, and safety, were assessed. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool and the Physiotherapy Evidence Database Scale. Meta-analysis was performed using the RevMan 5.4 software.</jats:p>\n                  </jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Results</jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>\n                      Forty-four studies with 1555 participants were included. Transcranial direct current stimulation proved effective in improving upper extremity motor function (standardized mean difference = 0.22, 95% confidence interval: 0.12–0.32, P &lt; 0.001) and Barthel Index (mean difference = 4.65, 95% confidence interval: 2.82–6.49, P &lt; 0.001). Subgroup analysis revealed the highest transcranial direct current stimulation efficacy in patients with subacute stroke. Both anodal and cathodal stimulation were effective against upper extremity motor dysfunction. C3/C4 was the most effective stimulus target. Optimal stimulation parameters included stimulus current densities &lt;0.057 mA/cm\n                      <jats:sup>2</jats:sup>\n                      for 20–30 min and &lt;30 sessions. Adverse effects and dropouts during follow-up showed that transcranial direct current stimulation is safe and feasible.\n                    </jats:p>\n                  </jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Conclusions</jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>Our findings suggest that both anodal and cathodal stimulation were significantly effective in subacute stroke patients, particularly when preceding other treatments and when C3/C4 is targeted.</jats:p>\n                  </jats:sec>","is_dataset_classified":null,"base_score":0.0,"endowment":0.0,"datacite_reuse_total":0,"file_count":0,"downloads":0,"views":0,"has_version_chain":false,"is_dataset":false,"is_oa":false,"pmid":"38425282","pmcid":null,"openalex_id":null,"authors":[],"funders":[{"funder_name":"Scientific Research Program of Hebei Administration of Traditional Chinese Medicine","grant_id":"2023065","title":null},{"funder_name":"Medical Science Research Project of Hebei Province","grant_id":"20210916","title":null},{"funder_name":"Medical Science Research Project of Hebei Province","grant_id":"20211628","title":null},{"funder_name":"National Key Research and Development Program of China","grant_id":"2022YFC3600503","title":null},{"funder_name":"Natural Science Foundation of Hebei Province","grant_id":"H2020206632","title":null},{"funder_name":"Natural Science Foundation of Hebei Province","grant_id":"H2020206643","title":null}],"total_grants":6,"fwci":null,"citation_percentile":null,"influential_citations":0,"citation_trend":[],"oa_status":"bronze","license":"https://journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license","oa_locations":[{"url":"https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/02692155241235336?download=true","host_type":"publisher"},{"url":"https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/02692155241235336","host_type":"publisher"},{"url":"https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full-xml/10.1177/02692155241235336","host_type":"publisher"}],"fields_of_study":[],"mesh_terms":["Upper Extremity","Humans","Recovery of Function","Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic","Stroke","Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation","Stroke Rehabilitation"],"keywords":["Upper extremity","Meta-analysis","Stroke","Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation"],"sdg_mappings":[],"linked_datasets":[],"clinical_trials":[],"software_tools":[],"database_accessions":[],"source":"live","citation_network_status":"fetched"},"created_at":"2026-08-16T15:46:22.057888Z","pmid":null,"pmcid":null,"fwci":null,"citation_percentile":null,"influential_citations":0,"oa_status":null,"license":null,"views":0,"total_file_size_bytes":0,"version_count":0,"fair_f":null,"fair_a":null,"fair_i":null,"fair_r":null,"fair_zscore":null,"fair_rationale":null,"fair_model":null,"fair_agent_version":null,"fair_fulltext_source":null,"fair_has_llm":null,"fair_computed_at":null,"clinical_trials":[],"software_tools":[],"db_accessions":[],"linked_datasets":[],"topics":[]}