Key result
Among 9 sham-controlled studies, 5 reported a significant impact of transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on reducing rumination, though findings were limited by substantial heterogeneity.
Why the study?
Rumination is associated with worse psychiatric outcomes, and transcranial Direct Current Stimulation has emerged as a promising tool to alleviate it, warranting an assessment of study effectiveness and research quality.
Does transcranial Direct Current Stimulation reduce rumination in healthy participants or patients with psychiatric disorders?
Systematic Review
Does transcranial Direct Current Stimulation reduce rumination in healthy participants or patients with psychiatric disorders?
Current evidence for tDCS in reducing rumination is mixed and limited by significant methodological flaws, highlighting the need for improved research practices.
Mixed results preclude clinical use of tDCS for rumination; leaves open the need for standardized sham-controlled trials.
Introduction. Broadly considered a transdiagnostic feature of psychological disorders, rumination is associated with lower treatment response, slower recovery rates, and higher relapse rates. Accordingly, research has focused on the development of interventions to alleviate rumination. Recently, transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) has emerged as a promising tool to do so.Methods. We performed a systematic review of sham-controlled tDCS studies targeting rumination among healthy participants or patients with psychiatric disorders, investigating the effectiveness of tDCS in reducing rumination, and assessing the research quality of this nascent field.Results. We identified nine studies, with five reporting a significant impact of tDCS on rumination. We also outlined a few tDCS parameters (e.g., stimulation duration, electrode size) and research methods' features (e.g., within- versus between-research designs) characterizing those positive-finding studies. However, these studies were characterized by substantial heterogeneity (e.g., methodological flaws, lack of open science practices), precluding any definite statement about the best way to target rumination via tDCS. Moreover, several strong methodological limitations were also present across those studies.Discussion. Although our systematic review identifies the strengths and weaknesses of the available research about the impact of tDCS on rumination, it calls for strong efforts to improve this nascent field's current methodological caveats. We discuss how open science practices can help to usher this field forward.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hoebeke et al. (2020) conducted a systematic review in Rumination. Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) vs. Sham was evaluated on Reduction in rumination. Among 9 sham-controlled studies, 5 reported a significant impact of transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on reducing rumination, though findings were limited by substantial heterogeneity.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: