↓ Skip to main content

Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Combined with Aerobic Exercise to Optimize Analgesic Responses in Fibromyalgia: A Randomized Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trial

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (54th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
123 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
363 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Combined with Aerobic Exercise to Optimize Analgesic Responses in Fibromyalgia: A Randomized Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trial
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, March 2016
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2016.00068
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mariana E. Mendonca, Marcel Simis, Luanda C. Grecco, Linamara R. Battistella, Abrahão F. Baptista, Felipe Fregni

Abstract

Fibromyalgia is a chronic pain syndrome that is associated with maladaptive plasticity in neural central circuits. One of the neural circuits that are involved in pain in fibromyalgia is the primary motor cortex. We tested a combination intervention that aimed to modulate the motor system: transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) of the primary motor cortex (M1) and aerobic exercise (AE). In this phase II, sham-controlled randomized clinical trial, 45 subjects were assigned to 1 of 3 groups: tDCS + AE, AE only, and tDCS only. The following outcomes were assessed: intensity of pain, level of anxiety, quality of life, mood, pressure pain threshold, and cortical plasticity, as indexed by transcranial magnetic stimulation. There was a significant effect for the group-time interaction for intensity of pain, demonstrating that tDCS/AE was superior to AE [F (13, 364) = 2.25, p = 0.007] and tDCS [F (13, 364) = 2.33, p = 0.0056] alone. Post-hoc adjusted analysis showed a difference between tDCS/AE and tDCS group after the first week of stimulation and after 1 month intervention period (p = 0.02 and p = 0.03, respectively). Further, after treatment there was a significant difference between groups in anxiety and mood levels. The combination treatment effected the greatest response. The three groups had no differences regarding responses in motor cortex plasticity, as assessed by TMS. The combination of tDCS with aerobic exercise is superior compared with each individual intervention (cohen's d effect sizes > 0.55). The combination intervention had a significant effect on pain, anxiety and mood. Based on the similar effects on cortical plasticity outcomes, the combination intervention might have affected other neural circuits, such as those that control the affective-emotional aspects of pain. (www.ClinicalTrials.gov), identifier NTC02358902.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 363 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 2 <1%
Spain 2 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
Unknown 357 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 66 18%
Student > Master 49 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 42 12%
Researcher 32 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 21 6%
Other 49 13%
Unknown 104 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 71 20%
Nursing and Health Professions 47 13%
Neuroscience 38 10%
Psychology 32 9%
Sports and Recreations 22 6%
Other 33 9%
Unknown 120 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 December 2022.
All research outputs
#13,175,336
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#3,552
of 7,319 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#135,159
of 301,881 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#77
of 162 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,319 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 301,881 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 162 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.