{"title":"Transcranial direct current stimulation for obsessive compulsive disorder: A systematic review and CONSORT evaluation.","authors":"Peta E Green, Andrea M Loftus, Rebecca A Anderson","doi":"10.1017/S1355617724000602","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Methods: </strong>This systematic review was prospectively registered with PROSPERO (CRD42023426005) and the data collected in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The quality of reporting of included studies was evaluated in accordance with the CONSORT statement.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eleven randomized controlled trials were identified. Evaluation of the reviewed studies revealed low levels of overall compliance with the CONSORT statement highlighting the need for improved reporting. Key areas included insufficient information about - the intervention (for replicability), participant flow, recruitment, and treatment effect sizes. Study discussions did not fully consider limitations and generalizability, and the discussion/interpretation of the findings were often incongruent with the results and therefore misleading. Only two studies reported a significant difference between sham and active tDCS for OCD outcomes, with small effect sizes noted.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The variability in protocols, lack of consistency in procedures, combined with limited significant findings, makes it difficult to draw any meaningful conclusions about the effectiveness of tDCS for OCD. Future studies need to be appropriately powered, empirically driven, randomized sham-controlled clinical trials.</p>","PeriodicalId":49995,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society","volume":" ","pages":"1-12"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1355617724000602","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Methods: This systematic review was prospectively registered with PROSPERO (CRD42023426005) and the data collected in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The quality of reporting of included studies was evaluated in accordance with the CONSORT statement.
Results: Eleven randomized controlled trials were identified. Evaluation of the reviewed studies revealed low levels of overall compliance with the CONSORT statement highlighting the need for improved reporting. Key areas included insufficient information about - the intervention (for replicability), participant flow, recruitment, and treatment effect sizes. Study discussions did not fully consider limitations and generalizability, and the discussion/interpretation of the findings were often incongruent with the results and therefore misleading. Only two studies reported a significant difference between sham and active tDCS for OCD outcomes, with small effect sizes noted.
Conclusions: The variability in protocols, lack of consistency in procedures, combined with limited significant findings, makes it difficult to draw any meaningful conclusions about the effectiveness of tDCS for OCD. Future studies need to be appropriately powered, empirically driven, randomized sham-controlled clinical trials.
期刊介绍：
The Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society is the official journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, an organization of over 4,500 international members from a variety of disciplines. The Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society welcomes original, creative, high quality research papers covering all areas of neuropsychology. The focus of articles may be primarily experimental, applied, or clinical. Contributions will broadly reflect the interest of all areas of neuropsychology, including but not limited to: development of cognitive processes, brain-behavior relationships, adult and pediatric neuropsychology, neurobehavioral syndromes (such as aphasia or apraxia), and the interfaces of neuropsychology with related areas such as behavioral neurology, neuropsychiatry, genetics, and cognitive neuroscience. Papers that utilize behavioral, neuroimaging, and electrophysiological measures are appropriate.
To assure maximum flexibility and to promote diverse mechanisms of scholarly communication, the following formats are available in addition to a Regular Research Article: Brief Communication is a shorter research article; Rapid Communication is intended for "fast breaking" new work that does not yet justify a full length article and is placed on a fast review track; Case Report is a theoretically important and unique case study; Critical Review and Short Review are thoughtful considerations of topics of importance to neuropsychology and include meta-analyses; Dialogue provides a forum for publishing two distinct positions on controversial issues in a point-counterpoint format; Special Issue and Special Section consist of several articles linked thematically; Letter to the Editor responds to recent articles published in the Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society; and Book Review, which is considered but is no longer solicited.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
