Europe PMC
Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]

Europe PMC requires Javascript to function effectively.

Either your web browser doesn't support Javascript or it is currently turned off. In the latter case, please turn on Javascript support in your web browser and reload this page.

This website requires cookies, and the limited processing of your personal data in order to function. By using the site you are agreeing to this as outlined in our privacy notice and cookie policy.

Transcranial direct current stimulation for major depression: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis.

Author information

Affiliations

  • 1. Interdisciplinary Centre for Applied Neuromodulation - University Hospital,University of São Paulo,Brazil.
      Authors
    • Shiozawa P 1
    • Benseñor IM 1
    • Lotufo PA 1
    • Brunoni AR 1
    (4 authors)
  • 2. Neuromodulation Laboratory, Spaulding Rehabilitation Center - Harvard Medical School,Boston, MA,USA.
      Authors
    • Fregni F 2
    (1 author)
  • 3. Department of Psychiatry,McGill University,Montreal,Canada.
      Authors
    • Berlim MT 3
    (1 author)
  • 4. Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (CAMH) Collaborative Program in Neuroscience,University of Toronto,Canada.
      Authors
    • Daskalakis JZ 4
    (1 author)
  • 5. Laboratory of Neuromodulation,Santa Casa Medical School - São Paulo,Brazil.
      Authors
    • Cordeiro Q 5
    (1 author)

ORCIDs linked to this article

The International Journal of Neuropsychopharmacology, 08 Apr 2014, 17(9):1443-1452
https://doi.org/10.1017/s1461145714000418 PMID: 24713139 

Review

This article has been corrected. See Int J Neuropsychopharmacol. 2014 Sep;17(9):1539.

Abstract 

Transcranial direct cranial stimulation (tDCS) is a promising non-pharmacological intervention for treating major depressive disorder (MDD). However, results from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and meta-analyses are mixed. Our aim was to assess the efficacy of tDCS as a treatment for MDD. We performed a systematic review in Medline and other databases from the first RCT available until January 2014. The main outcome was the Hedges' g for continuous scores; secondary outcomes were the odds ratio (ORs) to achieve response and remission. We used a random-effects model. Seven RCTs (n = 259) were included, most with small sample sizes that assessed tDCS as either a monotherapy or as an add-on therapy. Active vs. sham tDCS was significantly superior for all outcomes (g = 0.37; 95% CI 0.04-0.7; ORs for response and remission were, respectively, 1.63; 95% CI = 1.26-2.12 and 2.50; 95% CI = 1.26-2.49). Risk of publication bias was low. No predictors of response were identified, possibly owing to low statistical power. In summary, active tDCS was statistically superior to sham tDCS for the acute depression treatment, although its role as a clinical intervention is still unclear owing to the mixed findings and heterogeneity of the reviewed studies. Further RCTs with larger sample sizes and assessing tDCS efficacy beyond the acute depressive episode are warranted.

Full text links 

Read article at publisher's site: https://doi.org/10.1017/s1461145714000418

Read article for free, from open access legal sources, via Unpaywall: https://academic.oup.com/ijnp/article-pdf/17/9/1443/6954975/17-9-1443.pdfUnpaywall

References 

Articles referenced by this article (31)

Show 10 more references (10 of 31)

Citations & impact 

Impact metrics

114
Citations
Jump to Citations

Citations of article over time

Alternative metrics

Altmetric item for https://www.altmetric.com/details/2293899
Altmetric
Discover the attention surrounding your research
https://www.altmetric.com/details/2293899

Article citations

Go to all (114) article citations

Similar Articles 

To arrive at the top five similar articles we use a word-weighted algorithm to compare words from the Title and Abstract of each citation.