The DOI matches its Crossref record; 36 of the 36 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A Controlled Clinical Trial of Cathodal DC Polarization in Patients with Refractory Epilepsy
Open accessAbstract
Summary: Purpose: To study the effects of cathodal DC polarization in patients with refractory epilepsy and malformations of cortical development (MCDs) as indexed by seizure frequency and epileptiform EEG discharges. Methods: Nineteen patients with MCDs and refractory epilepsy underwent one session of DC polarization (20 min, 1 mA) targeting the epileptogenic focus. The number of epileptiform discharges (EDs) in the EEG and seizures were measured before (baseline), immediately after, and 15 and 30 days after either sham or active DC polarization. Seizure frequency after the treatment was compared with baseline. Results: Active compared with sham DC polarization was associated with a significant reduction in the number of epileptiform discharges [mean ED reduction of −64.3% (95% CI, −122.5% to −6.0%) for the active treatment group and −5.8% (95% CI, −26.8% to 15.2%) for the sham treatment group]. A trend (p = 0.06) was noted for decrease in seizure frequency after active compared with sham treatment [mean seizure frequency decrease of −44.0% (95% CI, −95.0% to 7.1%) for the active treatment group and −11.1% (95% CI, −22.2% to 44.4%) for the sham treatment group]. Conclusions: This randomized, controlled study shows that cathodal DC polarization does not induce seizures and is well tolerated in patients with refractory epilepsy and MCDs. Furthermore, the results suggest that this technique might have an antiepileptic effect based on clinical and electrophysiological criteria.
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
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
Self-citationSustained 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
Self-citationLiebetanz, D. (2002) · Brain · doi:10.1093/brain/awf238 · Cited by 1,383
Anodal transcranial direct current stimulation of prefrontal cortex enhances working memory
Fregni, F., Boggio, P. S., Nitsche, M., Bermpohl, F., Antal, A., Feredoes, E., Marcolin, M. A., Rigonatti, S. P., Silva, M. T. A., Paulus, W., et al. (2005) · Experimental Brain Research · doi:10.1007/s00221-005-2334-6 · Cited by 1,159 · cited 1×
“Several studies have shown that this technique might modulate cortical excitability in the human motor (18–20), prefrontal (21), and visual cortex (17,22).”
BackgroundSelf-citationEffects of non-invasive cortical stimulation on skilled motor function in chronic stroke
Hummel, F. (2005) · Brain · doi:10.1093/brain/awh369 · Cited by 1,114
Bindman, L. J., Lippold, O. C. J., & Redfearn, J. W. T. (1964) · The Journal of Physiology · doi:10.1113/jphysiol.1964.sp007425 · Cited by 978
INTRACELLULAR ACTIVITIES AND EVOKED POTENTIAL CHANGES DURING POLARIZATION OF MOTOR CORTEX
Purpura, D. P., & McMurtry, J. G. (1965) · Journal of Neurophysiology · doi:10.1152/jn.1965.28.1.166 · Cited by 870
Nitsche, M. A., Seeber, A., Frommann, K., Klein, C. C., Rochford, C., Nitsche, M. S., Fricke, K., Liebetanz, D., Lang, N., Antal, A., et al. (2005) · The Journal of Physiology · doi:10.1113/jphysiol.2005.092429 · Cited by 744
Self-citationLevel of action of cathodal DC polarisation induced inhibition of the human motor cortex
Nitsche, M. A., Nitsche, M. S., Klein, C. C., Tergau, F., Rothwell, J. C., & Paulus, W. (2003) · Clinical Neurophysiology · doi:10.1016/s1388-2457(02)00412-1 · Cited by 736
Self-citationSiebner, H. R., Lang, N., Rizzo, V., Nitsche, M. A., Paulus, W., Lemon, R. N., & Rothwell, J. C. (2004) · The Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.5316-03.2004 · Cited by 711
Self-citation
Cited by
Physiological basis of transcranial direct current stimulation
Stagg, C. J., & Nitsche, M. A. (2011) · The Neuroscientist · doi:10.1177/1073858410386614 · Cited by 1,719
Self-citationBrunoni, A. R., Nitsche, M. A., Bolognini, N., Bikson, M., Wagner, T., Merabet, L., Edwards, D. J., Valero-Cabre, A., Rotenberg, A., Pascual-Leone, A., et al. (2012) · Brain stimulation · doi:10.1016/j.brs.2011.03.002 · Cited by 1,445
Self-citationTranscranial direct current stimulation: A computer-based human model study
Wagner, T., Fregni, F., Fecteau, S., Grodzinsky, A., Zahn, M., & Pascual-Leone, A. (2007) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2007.01.027 · Cited by 567
Self-citationBoggio, P. S., Nunes, A., Rigonatti, S. P., Nitsche, M. A., Pascual-Leone, A., & Fregni, F. (2007) · Restorative Neurology and Neuroscience · doi:10.3233/rnn-2007-00375 · Cited by 521
Self-citationSafety limits of cathodal transcranial direct current stimulation in rats
Liebetanz, D., Koch, R., Mayenfels, S., König, F., Paulus, W., & Nitsche, M. A. (2009) · Clinical Neurophysiology · doi:10.1016/j.clinph.2009.01.022 · Cited by 401
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Fregni, F., Thome‐Souza, S., Nitsche, M. A., Freedman, S. D., Valente, K. D., & Pascual‐Leone, A.
- Venue
- Epilepsia
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2006-02
- Volume
- 47
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 335-342
- ISSN
- 0013-9580 (ISSN-L)
- 1528-1167
- OpenAlex
- W2090809739
- Cited by
- 295
- References
- 36
- FWCI
- 4.60
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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: A Controlled Clinical Trial of Cathodal DC Polarization in Patients with Refractory Epilepsy. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1528-1167.2006.00426.x
- The paper
- Fregni, F., Thome‐Souza, S., Nitsche, M. A., Freedman, S. D., Valente, K. D., & Pascual‐Leone, A. (2006). A Controlled Clinical Trial of Cathodal DC Polarization in Patients with Refractory Epilepsy. Epilepsia. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1528-1167.2006.00426.x
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.
