Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 250

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 14 of the 14 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Efficacy of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation/transcranial direct current stimulation in cognitive neurorehabilitation

Open access
Miniussi, Carlo, Cappa, Stefano F., Cohen, Leonardo G., Floel, Agnes, Fregni, Felipe, Nitsche, Michael A., Oliveri, Massimiliano, Pascual-Leone, Alvaro, Paulus, Walter, Priori, Alberto, Walsh, Vincent·2008·Brain Stimulation

Abstract

Cognitive deficits are a common consequence of neurologic disease, in particular, of traumatic brain injury, stroke, and neurodegenerative disorders, and there is evidence that specific cognitive training may be effective in cognitive rehabilitation. Several investigations emphasize the fact that interacting with cortical activity, by means of cortical stimulation, can positively affect the short-term cognitive performance and improve the rehabilitation potential of neurologic patients. In this respect, preliminary evidence suggests that cortical stimulation may play a role in treating aphasia, unilateral neglect, and other cognitive disorders. Several possible mechanisms can account for the effects of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) on cognitive performance. They all reflect the potential of these methods to improve the subject's ability to relearn or to acquire new strategies for carrying out behavioral tasks. The responsible mechanisms remain unclear but they are most likely related to the activation of impeded pathways or inhibition of maladaptive responses. Modifications of the brain activity may assist relearning by facilitating local activity or by suppressing interfering activity from other brain areas. Notwithstanding the promise of these preliminary findings, to date no systematic application of these methods to neurorehabilitation research has been reported. Considering the potential benefit of these interventions, further studies taking into consideration large patient populations, long treatment periods, or the combination of different rehabilitation strategies are needed. Brain stimulation is indeed an exciting opportunity in the field of cognitive neurorehabilitation, which is clearly in need of further research.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.brs.2008.07.002

Cites

14 of 14 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 14 references

Cited by

See all 250

Metadata

Authors
Miniussi, C., Cappa, S. F., Cohen, L. G., Floel, A., Fregni, F., Nitsche, M. A., Oliveri, M., Pascual-Leone, A., Paulus, W., Priori, A., & Walsh, V.
Venue
Brain Stimulation
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2008-10
Volume
1
Issue
4
Pages
326-336
ISSN
  • 1876-4754 (ISSN-L)
  • 1935-861X
OpenAlex
W2125060545
Cited by
250
References
14
FWCI
9.18
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Efficacy of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation/transcranial direct current stimulation in cognitive neurorehabilitation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.brs.2008.07.002
The paper
Miniussi, C., Cappa, S. F., Cohen, L. G., Floel, A., Fregni, F., Nitsche, M. A., Oliveri, M., Pascual-Leone, A., Paulus, W., Priori, A., & Walsh, V. (2008). Efficacy of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation/transcranial direct current stimulation in cognitive neurorehabilitation. Brain Stimulation. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brs.2008.07.002

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.