Brain-stimulation results for post-stroke neglect varied by method
Several stimulation approaches improved selected neglect measures, while the method labeled tACS showed no statistically significant differences on the reported tests.
Based on the published abstract. The full paper may contain additional methods, results and limitations.
The 30-second takeaway
Some brain-stimulation methods improved selected measures of spatial neglect after stroke. The method labeled tACS had no statistically significant differences from control on the reported tests; that does not establish equivalence. These findings concern a specific stroke complication, and differences across studies do not establish which method works best in direct comparisons.
The abstract does not describe control procedures, follow-up durations or confidence intervals for treatment effects. Subgroup patterns cannot by themselves establish which stimulation method should be preferred.
What researchers found
Line bisection test score
tACS versus control; timeframe unreported. SMD measures the score difference in standard deviations, using the spread of scores as the unit. The difference was not statistically significant; its confidence interval is absent.
A specific rehabilitation question
The review focused on a specific cognitive difficulty after stroke, spatial neglect, using named clinical tests and a rating scale. Improvements differed depending on both the stimulation method and the outcome measured.
Timing findings are exploratory
Subgroup results suggested that stroke phase and stimulation protocol might influence outcomes. They provide questions for future comparisons, rather than establishing the best treatment timing or protocol for an individual patient.
The original publication
Effect of noninvasive brain stimulation for unilateral spatial neglect after stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Zhao R, Hao T, Wang C et al.
J Neurol · 2026
- PubMed ID
- 41880010
- Record checked
AI-assisted research and writing. This explains one selected publication; it is not a complete review of everything known. Our approach.
One more question, understood.
Keep track of the research you’ve explored.