Efficacy of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation in Developmental Dyslexia: a scoping review.
Esther Constantino, Isabela Ciola de Castro, Vânia Lúcia Carvalho de Lima and 1 others
PMID 40008696WHAT IT FOUND
Most reviewed trials reported improved reading speed or accuracy with tDCS, but protocols varied widely in electrode placement and session number.
The authors note that small samples and inconsistent methods prevent a clear conclusion on efficacy or optimal application.
Key findings
01Active and anodal stimulation on the left generally showed better results in reading rate and accuracy tasks.
02The review did not quantify effects due to different parameters used in the research.
03Most studies had small samples and different methods, which restricts generalizability and hinders meta-analysis.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for SLPs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The included studies had small sample sizes, limiting generalizability. High variability in methods (electrode placement, session number, combined therapies) prevented a meta-analysis or quantification of effect sizes. The review is a scoping review, not a systematic review with quality appraisal or pooled statistics.
Declared interests
The study was financed in part by the São Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP), Brazil.
The easy way to misread this
Do not interpret the reported positive effects as proof of efficacy or a recommended protocol. The review explicitly states it did not quantify effects due to methodological variations, and the small samples and inconsistent parameters mean no specific tDCS application can be validated for clinical use based on this paper.