Skip to main content
News

Review Questions Utility of tDCS for Cognitive Symptoms in Schizophrenia

A recent meta-analysis has cast doubt on the effectiveness of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) for improving cognitive impairments in individuals with schizophrenia after finding no statistically significant difference in cognitive outcomes between tDCS and sham treatments. Findings from the review were published in Schizophrenia Research: Cognition.

“This meta-analysis underscores the lack of significant evidence for tDCS in addressing cognitive deficits in schizophrenia,” wrote Sadia Rehman Safwi, MBBS, MD, MPH, Yale School of Public Health, and coauthors. “There is a pressing need to standardize tDCS protocols and focus on domain-specific cognitive assessments to advance research in this field.”

QUIZ: Prodromal Symptoms in Schizophrenia

The study evaluated data from 13 randomized sham-controlled trials involving 508 participants (261 receiving tDCS and 247 receiving sham treatment). Using a random-effects model to account for heterogeneity, the researchers calculated a standardized mean difference (SMD) of 0.09 (95% CI: −0.17 to 0.35). Moderate heterogeneity (I² = 44%) was attributed to differences in tDCS protocols, participant characteristics, and the tools used to assess cognitive improvements.

While some individual studies reported gains in specific cognitive domains, such as working memory, the overall findings remained inconclusive.

The study’s findings are significant as they highlight the challenges of using tDCS, a non-invasive brain stimulation technique, as a reliable intervention for schizophrenia-related cognitive impairments. Researchers emphasize the need for further investigation, particularly into tailoring stimulation protocols to specific cognitive domains, to maximize potential benefits.

Reference

Safwi SR, Rizvi A, Usmani MA, et al. Transcranial direct current stimulation and its effect on cognitive symptoms of schizophrenia: An updated review. Schizophr Res Cogn. 2024;23(39). doi: 10.1016/j.scog.2024.100335