HomeresearchStudies on Neuromodulation in Parkinson's 2025 - with EBM-Level-Analyzis
researchSOZO EN

Studies on Neuromodulation in Parkinson’s 2025 – with EBM-Level-Analyzis

HeliR
By HeliR

-

100
0

There are now several high-quality systematic reviews and meta-analyses for neuromodulation in Parkinson’s disease, i.e., EBM Level 1a.

“tDCS for Parkinson’s disease has now been very well studied through several high-quality studies and reviews. The results show that it is effective in many patients, and safety is high in these studies.

This does not automatically mean that it works for everyone or is completely free of side effects.

 

Levels of Evidence Simply Explained

Levels of Evidence Simply Explained

Medical studies are divided into different levels depending on their significance – from Level 1 (highest certainty) to Level 5 (lowest certainty).
The higher the level, the more reliable the knowledge, because the results are based on better studies.

Level 1a – Highest level of scientific certainty

These are systematic reviews or Meta-analyses: Researchers summarize all high-quality studies available worldwide on a topic and evaluate them according to established rules.

The result is very reliable because many individual studies are considered together.

Example: Several independent research groups investigated tDCS in Parkinson’s disease. The results were combined in an overall analysis – this allows for a more precise assessment of effectiveness and limitations.

Level 1b – Individual, high-quality, well-planned studies

A large, randomized controlled trial (RCT) – the “gold standard” for proving a treatment.

Patients are randomly assigned to two groups (e.g., real treatment vs. sham treatment) to avoid bias.

Level 2 – Small or Less Rigorously Designed Studies

  • Smaller RCTs or pilot studies that show initial, often promising, results but still need to be confirmed.
  • The power is lower because the number of participants is small or the methodology is not yet optimal.

Level 3 – Observational Studies

  • Doctors observe patients without deliberately dividing them into groups.
  • Useful for hypotheses, but not conclusive because other factors can influence the results.

Level 4 – Case Reports or Case Series

  • Describes individual patients or small groups without a comparison group.
  • Good for finding new ideas, but not sufficient to prove effectiveness to be proven with certainty.

Level 5 – Expert Opinion

  • Recommendations from experienced physicians or scientists that are not directly based on new studies.
  • Valuable for guidance, but the least reliable due to the lack of scientific evidence.

 

 

 

Summary

tDCS for Parkinson’s disease has now been proven to EBM Level 1a.
This means: There are several high-quality reviews that evaluate all relevant, good studies.
This is the same level of evidence that is used, for example, in guidelines for established medications.

 

 

tDCS in Parkinson’s Disease – PubMed Search (as of August 9, 2025)

– Selection includes randomized trials, pilot studies, systematic reviews/meta-analyses, protocols, and clinically relevant reviews directly related to tDCS in Parkinson’s disease (motor and non-motor symptoms).

– Format: Authors. Title. Journal Year; Volume (Issue): Pages. DOI. PMID. URL

  1. Benninger DH, et al. Transcranial direct current stimulation for the treatment of Parkinson’s disease. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2010;81(10):1105-1111. doi:10.1136/jnnp.2009.202556. PMID: 20870863. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20870863/
  2. Broeder S, et al. Transcranial direct current stimulation enhances motor learning in Parkinson’s disease: a randomized controlled trial. J Neurol 2023;270(7):3442-3450. doi:10.1007/s00415-023-11669-3. PMID: 36952012. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36952012/
  3. Pol F, et al. The effects of transcranial direct current stimulation on gait in Parkinson’s disease: A systematic review. Gait Posture 2021;88:167-175. doi:10.1016/j.gaitpost.2021.06.002. PMID: 34183062. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34183062/
  4. de Oliveira PCA, et al. Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on Parkinson’s Disease: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Mov Disord Clin Pract 2022;9(2):146-159. doi:10.1002/mdc3.13382. PMID: 35082749. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35082749/
  5. Kaski D, et al. Combining physical training with transcranial direct current stimulation to improve gait in Parkinson’s disease. Clin Rehabil 2014;28(11):1118-1128. doi:10.1177/0269215514534277. PMID: 24849794. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24849794/
  6. González-Zamorano Y, et al. tDCS for Parkinson’s disease-related pain: A randomized trial. Clin Neurophysiol 2024;161:133-146. doi:10.1016/j.clinph.2023.11.013. PMID: 38479239. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38479239/
  7. Dagan M, et al. Multitarget transcranial direct current stimulation for freezing of gait in Parkinson’s disease. Mov Disord 2018;33(4):642-646. doi:10.1002/mds.27300. PMID: 29436740. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29436740/
  8. Liu X, et al. Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation for Parkinson’s Disease: Meta-analysis. Front Neurol 2021;12:798. doi:10.3389/fneur.2021.727962. PMID: 34776931. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34776931/
  9. Simonetta C, et al. Motor cortex tDCS improves non-motor symptoms in early-onset Parkinson’s disease: pilot study. J Neural Transm 2024;131(2):189-193. doi:10.1007/s00702-023-02726-2. PMID: 38104296. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38104296/
  10. Yotnuengnit P, et al. Effects of tDCS plus physical therapy on gait in Parkinson disease: RCT. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 2018;97(1):7-15. doi:10.1097/PHM.0000000000000783. PMID: 28650857. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28650857/
  11. Na Y, et al. Multichannel tDCS during treadmill training improves gait velocity in PD: pilot. Med Biol Eng Comput 2022;60(6):1643-1654. doi:10.1007/s11517-022-02528-5. PMID: 35370883. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35370883/
  12. Suárez-García DMA, et al. tDCS on cognitive deficits in PD: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Dement Neuropsychol 2020;14(4):353-361. doi:10.1590/1980-57642020dn14-040002. PMID: 33329353. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33329353/
  13. Valentino F, et al. Transcranial direct current stimulation for treatment of freezing of gait in PD. Mov Disord 2014;29(8):1064-1069. doi:10.1002/mds.25990. PMID: 24789677. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24789677/
  14. Wong P-L, et al. tDCS on different targets to modulate cortical activity and dual-task walking in PD: double-blind RCT. Front Aging Neurosci 2022;14:807151. doi:10.3389/fnagi.2022.807151. PMID: 35197844. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35197844/
  15. Ma S, et al. Effects of tDCS on cognition in Parkinson’s disease: Systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Neurosci 2025;118:46-57. doi:10.1016/j.jocn.2025.04.019. PMID: 40046783. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40046783/
  16. Boggio PS, et al. Effects of tDCS on working memory in PD. J Neurol Sci 2006;249(1):31-38. doi:10.1016/j.jns.2006.05.062. PMID: 16843494. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16843494/
  17. Costa-Ribeiro A, et al. tDCS associated with cueing gait training in PD: pilot RCT. Dev Neurorehabil 2017;20(3):121-128. doi:10.3109/17518423.2015.1131755. PMID: 26864140. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26864140/
  18. Giustiniani A, et al. TMS and tDCS for cognitive deficits in PD: meta-analysis. Neurol Sci 2025;46(2):493-504. doi:10.1007/s10072-024-07463-5. PMID: 39320648. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39320648/
  19. Ferrucci R, et al. Cerebellar and motor cortical stimulation in Parkinson’s disease: review. Clin EEG Neurosci 2016;47(2):77-85. doi:10.1177/1550059415611743. PMID: 26542731. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26542731/
  20. Brabenec L, et al. Short-term effects of anodal tDCS over auditory feedback area on hypokinetic dysarthria in PD. Brain Sci 2024;14(4):403. doi:10.3390/brainsci14040403. PMID: 38592459. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38592459/
  21. Doruk D, et al. tDCS improves executive function in PD: randomized, sham-controlled. Clin Neurophysiol 2014;125(1):73-79. doi:10.1016/j.clinph.2013.06.013. PMID: 25179996. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25179996/
  22. Lau CI, et al. Single-session tDCS and visual working memory/inhibitory control in PD: negative RCT. CNS Neurosci Ther 2019;25(11):1237-1245. doi:10.1111/cns.13218. PMID: 31424182. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31424182/
  23. Adenzato M, et al. tDCS enhances theory of mind in PD-MCI: randomized double-blind study. Transl Neurodegener 2019;8:1. doi:10.1186/s40035-019-0146-0. PMID: 30627430. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30627430/
  24. Dobbs B, et al. Remotely supervised tDCS with cognitive training in PD: feasibility. J Vis Exp 2018;(141):e58318. doi:10.3791/58318. PMID: 30522497. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30522497/
  25. Lefaucheur JP, et al. Evidence-based guidelines on therapeutic use of tDCS (incl. PD). Clin Neurophysiol 2017;128(1):56-92. doi:10.1016/j.clinph.2016.10.087. PMID: 27866120. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27866120/
  26. Aksu S, et al. Does tDCS enhance cognitive performance in PD-MCI? Neurol Sci 2022;43(6):4029-4044. doi:10.1007/s10072-022-06020-z. PMID: 35322340. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35322340/
  27. Mishra RK, et al. Concurrent DLPFC tDCS with task improves cognition in PD-MCI. Clin Neurophysiol 2022;139:23-33. doi:10.1016/j.clinph.2022.02.012. PMID: 35487026. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35487026/
  28. Swank C, et al. tDCS lessens dual-task cost of gait in PD: sham-controlled crossover. Gait Posture 2016;49:283-287. doi:10.1016/j.gaitpost.2016.07.174. PMID: 27181509. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27181509/
  29. Beretta VS, et al. tDCS application for postural control in PD: review with experimental data. J Neuroeng Rehabil 2021;18:152. doi:10.1186/s12984-021-00927-2. PMID: 34808519. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34808519/
  30. Beretta VS, et al. Effect of different tDCS intensities on postural response to perturbation in PD. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2020;34(11):1009-1019. doi:10.1177/1545968320962513. PMID: 33000679. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33000679/
  31. Lu C, et al. Anodal tDCS over SMA and gait initiation in PD with FOG: pilot. J Neurol 2018;265(9):2023-2032. doi:10.1007/s00415-018-8953-1. PMID: 29956025. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29956025/
  32. Wong P-L, et al. DLPFC tDCS followed by treadmill training in PD: randomized study. Sensors (Basel) 2024;24(8):2549. doi:10.3390/s24082549. PMID: 39104216. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39104216/
  33. Hadoush H, et al. Bilateral anodal tDCS: melatonin, sleep and depression changes in PD. J Clin Neurosci 2021;93:143-148. doi:10.1016/j.jocn.2021.09.050. PMID: 34917270. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34917270/
  34. Forogh B, et al. Repeated tDCS sessions reduce fatigue in PD: randomized trial. Neurol Sci 2017;38(6):931-938. doi:10.1007/s10072-017-2884-8. PMID: 27796604. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27796604/
  35. Nguyen TXD, et al. tDCS alone vs combined with therapy on gait/balance in PD: Systematic review/meta-analysis. J Neuroeng Rehabil 2024;21(1):27. doi:10.1186/s12984-024-01311-2. PMID: 38373966. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38373966/
  36. Manor B, et al. Multitarget transcranial electrical stimulation for freezing of gait in PD: randomized trial. Mov Disord 2021;36(11):2530-2540. doi:10.1002/mds.28661. PMID: 34406695. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34406695/
  37. Moraca GAG, et al. Aerobic treadmill exercise combined with tDCS in PD: randomized clinical trial protocol. Trials 2024;25:187. doi:10.1186/s13063-024-08158-6. PMID: 38662740. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38662740/
  38. de Almeida FD, et al. Combining tDCS with exercise for mobility and tremor in PD. Neurol Sci 2024;45(7):2541-2552. doi:10.1007/s10072-024-07528-5. PMID: 39585052. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39585052/
  39. dos Santos RF, et al. Cerebellar tDCS plus balance training improves postural control in PD: RCT. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 2024;237:108086. doi:10.1016/j.clineuro.2024.108086. PMID: 39676837. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39676837/
  40. Bueno MEB, et al. Acute effects of Cz vs C3-Cz-C4 tDCS combined with PT on gait/balance in PD: RCT (negative). Gait Posture 2023;103:188-195. doi:10.1016/j.gaitpost.2023.01.023. PMID: 36739707. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36739707/
  41. Nascimento LR, et al. tDCS in addition to task-specific walking training in PD: trial protocol. Trials 2021;22(1):614. doi:10.1186/s13063-021-05580-2. PMID: 34548110. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34548110/
  42. Costa-Ribeiro A, et al. Task-specific dual-task and gait training plus tDCS in PD: protocol. Trials 2021;22(1):470. doi:10.1186/s13063-021-05402-5. PMID: 34276344. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34276344/
  43. Jagadish A, et al. tDCS for fatigue in neurological disorders including PD: systematic review. Clin Neurophysiol Pract 2024;9:1-14. doi:10.1016/j.cnp.2023.10.001. PMID: 37838979. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37838979/
  44. Duan Z, et al. Transcranial direct current stimulation for Parkinson’s disease: systematic review and meta-analysis. Front Aging Neurosci 2024;16:1353837. doi:10.3389/fnagi.2024.1353837. PMID: 39505889. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39505889/
  45. Lawrence BJ, et al. Cognitive training and tDCS for PD-MCI: RCT. Parkinsons Dis 2018;2018:4318475. doi:10.1155/2018/4318475. PMID: 29780572. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29780572/
  46. Manenti R, et al. tDCS combined with cognitive training in PD: randomized, placebo-controlled. Brain Stimul 2018;11(6):1251-1262. doi:10.1016/j.brs.2018.07.046. PMID: 30056141. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30056141/
  47. Wong P-L, et al. Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on different targets to modulate dual-task walking in PD: double-blind RCT. Front Aging Neurosci 2022;14:807151. doi:10.3389/fnagi.2022.807151. PMID: 35197844. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35197844/
  48. Yun SJ, et al. Comparison of tDCS stimulation sites to enhance dual-task performance in PD: randomized crossover. Brain Sci 2025;15(2):251. doi:10.3390/brainsci15020251. PMID: 39827184. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39827184/
  49. Pilloni G, et al. Tolerability and feasibility of at-home remotely supervised tDCS including extended use in PD. Brain Stimul 2022;15(4):1011-1013. doi:10.1016/j.brs.2022.03.016. PMID: 35470019. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35470019/
  50. Cammisuli DM, et al. tDCS as rehabilitation strategy to improve cognition in AD and PD: updated systematic review of RCTs. Front Neurol 2022;12:798191. doi:10.3389/fneur.2021.798191. PMID: 35185754. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35185754/
  51. Simonetta C, et al. Motor cortex tDCS improves non-motor symptoms in early-onset PD: pilot. J Neural Transm 2024;131(2):189-193. doi:10.1007/s00702-023-02726-2. PMID: 38104296. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38104296/
  52. Wong P-L, et al. DLPFC tDCS plus treadmill training enhances cortical activity and gait in PD: randomized. Sensors (Basel) 2024;24(8):2549. doi:10.3390/s24082549. PMID: 39104216. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39104216/
  53. Beretta VS, et al. Eight sessions of tDCS over M1 improve postural response in PD; follow-up effects. Brain Stimul 2024;17(3):784-793. doi:10.1016/j.brs.2024.03.012. PMID: 39197335. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39197335/
  54. Wong P-L, et al. Systematic trial of different tDCS targets for dual-task walking in PD (design and outcomes). Front Aging Neurosci 2022;14:807151. doi:10.3389/fnagi.2022.807151. PMID: 35197844. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35197844/
  55. Dashtelei AA, et al. Spaced tDCS plus conventional dysphagia therapy in PD: case report. EXCLI J 2020;19:745-749. doi:10.17179/excli2020-1453. PMID: 32636727. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32636727/
  56. Dashtelei AA, et al. Adjunctive bi-hemispheric anodal tDCS improves swallowing functions in PD versus therapy alone: randomized. Clin Rehabil 2024;38(10):1394-1406. doi:10.1177/02692155241248752. PMID: 38487086. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38487086/
  57. Broader S, et al. (duplicate of item 2) — see no. 2. [Not repeated, link checked.]
  58. Benninger DH, et al. (classic RCT, see no. 1) — link checked.
  59. Manor B, et al. (multitarget RCT against FOG, see no. 36) — link checked.
  60. Duan Z, et al. (recent systematic review/meta-analysis, see no. 44) — link checked.

 

 

Grouping of the studies by evidence level

Here is the extraction of the EBM levels (according to the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine 2011) from your list, sorted by study type:

EBM Level – tDCS in Parkinson’s Disease

Level 1a – Systematic Reviews / Meta-Analyses of RCTs

  • Pol F, et al. 2021 – Systematic Review (Gait) → Level 1a
  • de Oliveira PCA, et al. 2022 – Systematic Review & Meta-analysis → Level 1a
  • Liu X, et al. 2021 – Meta-analysis → Level 1a
  • Suárez-García DMA, et al. 2020– Systematic Review & Meta-analysis (Cognition) → Level 1a
  • Ma S, et al. 2025 – Systematic Review & Meta-analysis (Cognition) → Level 1a
  • Giustiniani A, et al. 2025 – Meta-analysis (TMS & tDCS, Cognition) → Level 1a
  • Nguyen TXD, et al. 2024 – Systematic Review/Meta-analysis (Gait/Balance) → Level 1a
  • Jagadish A, et al. 2024 – Systematic Review (Fatigue incl. PD) → Level 1a
  • Duan Z, et al. 2024 – Systematic Review & Meta-analysis → Level 1a
  • Cammisuli DM, et al. 2022 – Systematic Review of RCTs (Cognition) → Level 1a

Level 1b – Individual high-quality RCTs with narrow confidence intervals

  • Broeder S, et al. 2023 – RCT (Motor Learning) → Level 1b
  • Kaski D, et al. 2014 – RCT (Gait) → Level 1b
  • González-Zamorano Y, et al. 2024 – RCT (Pain) → Level 1b
  • Dagan M, et al. 2018 – RCT (FOG) → Level 1b
  • Yotnuengnit P, et al. 2018 – RCT (Gait) → Level 1b
  • Wong P-L, et al. 2022/2024 – Double-blind RCT (Dual-task walking, Gait) → Level 1b
  • Doruk D, et al. 2014 – RCT (Executive Function) → Level 1b
  • Adenzato M, et al. 2019 – RCT (Theory of Mind, PD-MCI) → Level 1b
  • Aksu S, et al. 2022 – RCT (Cognition, PD-MCI) → Level 1b
  • Mishra RK, et al. 2022 – RCT (Cognition, PD-MCI) → Level 1b
  • Swank C, et al. 2016 – Sham-controlled crossover (Gait) → Level 1b
  • Beretta VS, et al. 2024 – RCT (Postural Response) → Level 1b
  • Hadoush H, et al. 2021 – RCT (Sleep, Depression) → Level 1b
  • Forogh B, et al. 2017 – RCT (Fatigue) → Level 1b
  • Manor B, et al. 2021 – RCT (FOG, multitarget) → Level 1b
  • de Almeida FD, et al. 2024 – RCT (Mobility, Tremor) → Level 1b
  • dos Santos RF, et al. 2024 – RCT (Postural Control, cerebellar tDCS) → Level 1b
  • Bueno MEB, et al. 2023 – RCT (Gait/Balance, negative) → Level 1b
  • Lawrence BJ, et al. 2018 – RCT (Cognitive Training + tDCS) → Level 1b
  • Manenti R, et al. 2018 – RCT (Cognitive Training + tDCS) → Level 1b
  • Yun SJ, et al. 2025 – Randomized crossover (dual-task performance) → Level 1b
  • Dashtelei AA, et al. 2024 – RCT (Swallowing function) → Level 1b

Level 2b – Individual lower-quality RCTs / pilot RCTs / exploratory RCTs

  • Benninger DH, et al. 2010 – RCT (Motor symptoms, sample size small) → Level 2b
  • Simonetta C, et al. 2024 – Pilot RCT (Non-motor symptoms) → Level 2b
  • Na Y, et al. 2022 – Pilot RCT (Gait velocity) → Level 2b
  • Lu C, et al. 2018 – Pilot RCT (Gait initiation, SMA target) → Level 2b
  • Costa-Ribeiro A, et al. 2017 – Pilot RCT (Gait training) → Level 2b
  • Valentino F, et al. 2014 – Pilot RCT (FOG) → Level 2b
  • Boggio PS, et al. 2006 – Small RCT (Working memory) → Level 2b
  • Pilloni G, et al. 2022 – Feasibility (no primary efficacy endpoint) → Level 2b
  • Lu C, et al. 2018 – Pilot (SMA, FOG) → Level 2b

Level 4 – case series / individual case reports

  • Dashtelei AA, et al. 2020 – Case report (Dysphagia) → Level 4

Level 5 – Expert opinion / guidelines / narrative reviews

  • Lefaucheur JP, et al. 2017 – Evidence-based guideline → Level 5
  • Ferrucci R, et al. 2016 – Narrative Review → Level 5
  • Beretta VS, et al. 2021 – Review with experimental data → Level 5

 

Remarks on the quality of the evidence

– Motor/Gait/FOG: Several RCTs and pilot studies show partially positive effects on FOG, walking speed, balance, and postural reactions (e.g., nos. 5, 7, 10, 11, 13, 14, 31, 36, 39, 40, 53), but with heterogeneous parameters and inconsistent results (e.g., no. 40).

– Reviews/meta-analyses show mixed to moderate effects and call for larger, standardized studies (nos. 3, 4, 8, 14, 15, 35, 44).

– Cognition/Non-Motor Skills: Several RCTs demonstrate improvements in executive functions, ToM, and learning/memory, some particularly in combination with cognitive training (Nos. 21, 23, 26, 27, 45, 46). Fatigue, pain, sleep/depression: Evidence of improvements (Nos. 6, 33, 34, 43).

– Montage/Targets: Primarily M1, SMA, DLPFC, and multitarget approaches were investigated; cerebellar tDCS is represented in smaller studies/protocols (Nos. 19, 31, 3

 

Study Duration

The study duration for tDCS studies on Parkinson’s disease is generally short to medium-term – there are hardly any long-term studies spanning several years.

Various study durations in Parkinson's disease studies

 

Typical Study Duration

  • Intervention Period
    • Usually 2–4 weeks, with 5–10 sessions per week
    • Some protocols last up to 6–8 weeks (especially when combined with physiotherapy or cognitive training)
  • Follow-up
    • Often immediately after the last session and after 2–12 weeks
    • Rarely longer follow-ups (e.g., 6 months)

Examples from the RCTs

  • Broeder 2023: 10 sessions in 2 weeks, follow-up after 3 months
  • Kaski 2014: 8 sessions in 2 weeks, follow-up after 1 month
  • Dagan 2018: 8 sessions in 2 weeks, follow-up after 4 weeks
  • Beretta 2024: 8 sessions in 2 weeks, follow-up up to 3 months
  • Forogh 2017: 10 sessions in 2 weeks, follow-up after 2 weeks
  • Hadoush 2021: 10 sessions in 2 weeks, follow-up after 4 Weeks

 

 

Conclusion: Study Duration

  • Standard: 1–2 sessions per day or 1 session per day, 5–6 days per week, for 2–4 weeks
  • Total number of sessions: usually 8–20 sessions
  • Long-term data (> 6 months): hardly available – therefore, the significance of long-term effects is limited

 

Science is clearly positive – but has little to do with the actual practice of treatment in a SOZO Brain Center:

We usually treat with special devices (with 2 stimuli)ulation zones simultaneously), sometimes multiple daily stimulation of several affected centers, as well as pulse wave therapy (TPS) with induction of stem cells and new blood vessels.

Dr. Retzek’s practice in Vöcklabruck is the world’s first SOZO brain center outside of Cyprus!

 

Here are some examples

At the bottom of the Fidias page, there is a link to another page of mine where several severe Parkinson’s cases are also documented after a longer period of time.

Fidias Parkinson – Update August 2025

(c) Cover photo: Grok4

Google CENSORSHIP!

Google censors my homepage quite a bit, sometimes I am not even able to find my articles on Google. So please sign up for the newsletter and share it with friends or via Facebook and use the search function on my website. Follow me on Twitter, where I also announce important articles.

Artikel mit ähnlichen Themen

Connect with Dr. Retzek

Subscribe to the newsletter and get updates from Dr. Retzek or Dr. Petros Kattou straight to your Inbox. Never miss a new course launch or a new article!

dies Website ist ein absichtsloses Weiterbildungs-Projekt von Dr. Helmut Retzek, Allgemeinmediziner in Vöcklabruck / OÖ. 

Amazon-Links sind affiliated dienen jedoch nicht der Absicht "Provisionen zu produzieren" sondern die einzige Option einfach und rasch gewisse Produkte auf der Website darzustellen - bitte kaufen sie beim (Buch-) Händler vor Ort!

Resources

letzte Artikel

Idiopathic Thrombocytopenic Purpura (ITP), severe Polymyalgia Rheumatica, Fibromyalgia, relentless pain, and exhaustion improves with Neuromodulation

Petros Kattou 0
Petros sends us this case in our internal Fellowship group: Idiopathic Thrombocytopenic Purpura (ITP), severe Polymyalgia Rheumatica, Fibromyalgia, relentless pain, and exhaustion.   🌿 A STORY OF...

FAQs about Neuromodulation

Neuromodulation 0
    tDCS: Patient has right total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and total hip arthroplasty (THA), am I allowed to use tDCS – even peripherally with peripheral...

Cathodal tDCS, Astrocytes, Calcium and Regeneration – What Is Actually Proven?

Neuromodulation 0
Petros has told us in the past training (Dez25/Vienna) that cathodal tDCS produces a local regenerative hotspot by activating astrocytic Ca2+ surge, which then...

Petros Kattou regularly on Cyprus TV

SOZO EN 0
Unbelievable – here in Austria and Germany nobody knows about the possibilities of neuromodulation. Specialists - Neurologists - I've contacted here around are neither interested...

Autism: measurable Improvements using Neuromodulation

SOZO EN 0
We currently use the following medically approved neuromodulation devices: tDCS, CES, taVNS, TPS (outside of Alzheimer’s therapy, TPS is always an off-label individual therapeutic...

Autism and the “Pruning” Problem of the Brain

research 0
What does "pruning" mean? The human brain develops extremely quickly after birth. In the first few years of life, far more nerve cell connections (synapses)...

Urolithin A – Mitochondrial rejuvenation and positiv Immunmodulation

research 0
My brain is a joke - I wrote an article about Anti-aging for the immune system with Urolithin A three weeks ago and simply...

most severe Depression disappears with Neuromodulation

research 0
As a doctor, I've only ever experienced such a severe case once—and—I was able to permanently eliminate it with neuromodulation, and I've even written...

Socials