Table 1.

Characteristics of studies on transcranial electrical stimulation for post-stroke dysphagia included in the meta-analysis.

Author, year	Stroke Type	Sex, F/M	Sample Size	Mean age, years	Treatment duration, days	Session duration, min	Dosage, mA	Electrode size, cm²	Current density, mA/cm²	Intervention	Mean time post-stroke to treatment, days	Outcome measures
Ahn et al., 2017	Ischemic stroke	11/15	26	64	10	20	1	25	0.04	Anodal to both hemispheres’ pharyngeal motor cortex	357	VFSS, clinical swallow assessments, dysphagia scales
Kumar et al., 2011	Ischemic stroke	7/7	14	70	5	30	2	15	0.133	Anodal to unaffected inferior sensorimotor cortex and premotor regions	4.03	VFSS, clinical swallow assessments, dysphagia scales
Pingue et al., 2018	Ischemic stroke and intracerebral haemorrhage	20/20	40	65.25	10	30	2	25	0.08	Anodal to affected, cathodal to unaffected pharyngeal motor cortex	29.5	VFSS, clinical swallow assessments, dysphagia scales
Shigematsu et al., 2013	Ischemic stroke and intracerebral haemorrhage	7/13	20	65.8	10	20	1	35	0.029	Anodal to affected pharyngeal motor cortex	87.5	VFSS, clinical swallow assessments, dysphagia scales
Suntrup et al., 2018	Ischemic stroke	25/34	59	68.05	4	20	1	35	0.029	Anodal to unaffected pharyngeal motor cortex	4.85	FEES, clinical swallow assessments, dysphagia scales
Yang et al., 2012	Ischemic stroke	6/10	16	71	10	20	1	25	0.04	Anodal to affected pharyngeal motor cortex	25.9	VFSS, clinical swallow assessments, dysphagia scales

F, female; M, male; VFSS, video fluoroscopic swallow studies; FEES, fibreoptic endoscopic evaluation of swallowing.