经颅直流电刺激治疗强迫症:系统综述和 CONSORT 评估。

IF 2.6 4区 心理学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society Pub Date : 2024-11-19 DOI:10.1017/S1355617724000602
Peta E Green, Andrea M Loftus, Rebecca A Anderson
{"title":"经颅直流电刺激治疗强迫症:系统综述和 CONSORT 评估。","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":"{\"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}","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

摘要

方法:本系统综述在 PROSPERO(CRD42023426005)上进行了前瞻性注册,并根据系统综述和元分析首选报告项目(PRISMA)指南收集数据。根据 CONSORT 声明对纳入研究的报告质量进行了评估:结果:共确定了 11 项随机对照试验。对所审查的研究进行评估后发现,这些研究对 CONSORT 声明的总体遵守程度较低,这凸显了改进报告的必要性。关键领域包括:干预措施(可复制性)、参与者流动、招募和治疗效果大小等方面的信息不足。研究讨论没有充分考虑局限性和可推广性,对研究结果的讨论/解释往往与结果不一致,因此具有误导性。仅有两项研究报告了假性和活性 tDCS 对强迫症结果的显著差异,且效应大小较小:研究方案的多变性、程序的不一致性以及有限的重要发现,使得我们很难就 tDCS 对强迫症的疗效得出任何有意义的结论。未来的研究需要进行适当的、经验驱动的随机假对照临床试验。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Transcranial direct current stimulation for obsessive compulsive disorder: A systematic review and CONSORT evaluation.

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.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
3.80%
发文量
185
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
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.
期刊最新文献
Transcranial direct current stimulation for obsessive compulsive disorder: A systematic review and CONSORT evaluation. Traumatic brain injury, posttraumatic stress disorder, and vascular risk are independently associated with white matter aging in Vietnam-Era veterans. The prefrontal cortex, but not the medial temporal lobe, is associated with episodic memory in middle-aged persons with HIV. Simplifying Complex Figure scoring: Data from the Emory Healthy Brain Study and initial clinical validation. Optimal functioning after early mild traumatic brain injury: Evolution and predictors.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1