Jo 2008.

Methods	Method: Randomised cross‐over trial Number of dropouts: none Number of adverse effects: 6 Deaths: none ITT: yes
Participants	Country: Republic of Korea Sample size: 10 participants Inclusion criteria: Unilateral right hemispheric stroke, younger than 70 years; noticeable cognitive disorder after stroke; written informed consent Exclusion criteria: Seizures; metal implants in the head, cardiac pacemaker; history of neuropsychiatric diseases
Interventions	Each participant underwent one of the following treatments: single session of A‐tDCS over the DLPFC of the non‐lesioned hemisphere (2 mA for 30 minutes) followed by a single session sham tDCS over the DLPFC of the non‐lesioned hemisphere (2 mA for 10 seconds), separated by at least 48 hours wash‐out period single session sham tDCS over the DLPFC of the non‐lesioned hemisphere (2 mA for 10 seconds) followed by single A‐tDCS over the DLPFC of the non‐lesioned hemisphere (2 mA for 30 minutes), separated by at least 48 hours wash‐out period
Outcomes	Outcomes were measured at baseline and at the end of intervention period Response accuracy Recognition accuracy Response time of a two‐back verbal working memory task
Notes
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Quote: "The order of stimulation was randomly assigned for all participants"
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Not described by the authors
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) Subjective outcome measures	Low risk	There were no subjective outcome measures
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) Objective outcome measures	Low risk	Participants have been blinded by sham tDCS; blinding of personnel not stated
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) Subjective outcome measures	Low risk	There were no subjective outcome measures
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) Objective outcome measures	Low risk	Not described by the authors, however all outcome data were acquired by a computerised assessment during cognitive tasks
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) Subjective outcome measures	Low risk	There were no subjective outcome measures
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) Objective outcome measures	Low risk	All randomised participants apparently completed the study. No treatment withdrawals, no losses to follow‐up, no trial group changes and no major adverse events were stated
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Unclear risk	All outcomes reported in the methods section reported