Question · asked by 1 review
tDCS plus speech and language therapy (SLT) vs sham tDCS plus SLT: tDCS plus speech and language therapy (SLT) versus sham tDCS plus SLT for improving aphasia: dropouts Dropouts and adverse events
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
tDCS plus speech and language therapy (SLT) vs sham tDCS plus SLT tDCS plus speech and language therapy (SLT) versus sham tDCS plus SLT for improving aphasia: dropouts post intervention Numbers of dropouts and adverse events · patients with improving aphasia in patients with aphasia after stroke Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) for improving aphasia in adults with aphasia after stroke (2019) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | no estimate extracted | 15 studies · 345 participants | Low |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) for improving aphasia in adults with aphasia after stroke 2019 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | Not reported | list not extracted yet | Not assessed |
Studies behind the findings
None of these reviews ties its included studies to this outcome in the data here. Cochrane reviews and reviews with headline outcomes only do not list their studies yet.
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.