The DOI matches its Crossref record; 91 of the 91 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Effects of Anodal Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on Working Memory: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Findings From Healthy and Neuropsychiatric Populations
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND Several studies have trialled anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (a-tDCS) for the enhancement of working memory (WM) in both healthy and neuropsychiatric populations. However, the efficacy of this technique remains to be clearly established. OBJECTIVE This review provides a quantitative synthesis of the published literature investigating the effects of a-tDCS, compared to sham, on WM, as assessed using the n-back, Sternberg and digit-span tasks. We also separated results from tasks performed 'online' (during stimulation) and 'offline' (following stimulation). The secondary aim was to assess for any additional effects of current density and stimulation duration. METHODS Comprehensive literature searches were performed using MEDLINE, Embase, PsychINFO, CENTRAL and Scopus from July 1998 to June 2014. RESULTS In healthy cohorts, a-tDCS produced a trend towards improvement for offline WM accuracy (p = 0.05) and a small, but significant improvement in reaction time (p = 0.04); however, no significant effects were observed for online tasks (accuracy [p = 0.29], reaction time [p = 0.42]). In the neuropsychiatric cohort, a-tDCS significantly improved accuracy for online (p = 0.003), but not offline (p = 0.87) tasks, and no effect was seen for either online (p = 0.20) or offline (p = 0.49) reaction times. Secondary analyses controlling for current density and stimulation duration provided limited support for the role of these factors in influencing a-tDCS efficacy. CONCLUSIONS This review provides some evidence of a beneficial effect of a-tDCS on WM performance. However, the small effect sizes obtained, coupled with non-significant effects on several analyses require cautious interpretation and highlight the need for future research aimed at investigating more optimised stimulation approaches.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences
(1990) · Computers, Environment and Urban Systems · doi:10.1016/0198-9715(90)90050-4 · Cited by 65,269
Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test
Egger, M., Smith, G. D., Schneider, M., & Minder, C. (1997) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.315.7109.629 · Cited by 56,722
Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed.).
Lachenbruch, P. A., & Cohen, J. (1989) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.2307/2290095 · Cited by 37,395
Sterne, J. A. C., Sutton, A. J., Ioannidis, J. P. A., Terrin, N., Jones, D. R., Lau, J., Carpenter, J., Rucker, G., Harbord, R. M., Schmid, C. H., et al. (2011) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.d4002 · Cited by 7,709
Individual differences in working memory and reading
Daneman, M., & Carpenter, P. A. (1980) · Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior · doi:10.1016/s0022-5371(80)90312-6 · Cited by 6,336
Nitsche, M. A., & Paulus, W. (2000) · The Journal of Physiology · doi:10.1111/j.1469-7793.2000.t01-1-00633.x · Cited by 5,656
Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-III
Ryan, J. J., & Lopez, S. J. (2001) · Understanding Psychological Assessment · doi:10.1007/978-1-4615-1185-4_2 · Cited by 3,731
High-speed scanning in human memory
Sternberg, S. (1966) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.153.3736.652 · Cited by 3,576
N-back working memory paradigm: a meta-analysis of normative functional neuroimaging studies.
Owen, A. M., McMillan, K. M., Laird, A. R., & Bullmore, E. (2005) · Human Brain Mapping · doi:10.1002/hbm.20131 · Cited by 3,560
Sustained excitability elevations induced by transcranial DC motor cortex stimulation in humans
Nitsche, M. A., & Paulus, W. (2001) · Neurology · doi:10.1212/wnl.57.10.1899 · Cited by 2,617
Cited by
Begemann, M. J., Brand, B. A., Ćurčić-Blake, B., Aleman, A., & Sommer, I. E. (2020) · Psychological Medicine · doi:10.1017/s0033291720003670 · Cited by 368
Does Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Improve Healthy Working Memory?: A Meta-analytic Review
Mancuso, L. E., Ilieva, I. P., Hamilton, R. H., & Farah, M. J. (2016) · Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience · doi:10.1162/jocn_a_00956 · Cited by 294
The importance of sample size for reproducibility of tDCS effects
Minarik, T., Berger, B., Althaus, L., Bader, V., Biebl, B., Brotzeller, F., Fusban, T., Hegemann, J., Jesteadt, L., Kalweit, L., et al. (2016) · Frontiers in Human Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnhum.2016.00453 · Cited by 179
Augmentation of working memory training by transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS)
Ruf, S. P., Fallgatter, A. J., & Plewnia, C. (2017) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-017-01055-1 · Cited by 167
Salehinejad, M. A., Wischnewski, M., Nejati, V., Vicario, C. M., & Nitsche, M. A. (2019) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0215095 · Cited by 126
Metadata
- Authors
- Hill, A. T., Fitzgerald, P. B., & Hoy, K. E.
- Venue
- Brain Stimulation
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2016-03
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 197-208
- ISSN
- 1876-4754 (ISSN-L)
- 1935-861X
- OpenAlex
- W2104177392
- Cited by
- 422
- References
- 91
- FWCI
- 3.24
- 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: Effects of Anodal Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on Working Memory: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Findings From Healthy and Neuropsychiatric Populations. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.brs.2015.10.006
- The paper
- Hill, A. T., Fitzgerald, P. B., & Hoy, K. E. (2016). Effects of Anodal Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on Working Memory: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Findings From Healthy and Neuropsychiatric Populations. Brain Stimulation. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brs.2015.10.006
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.