Table 2.

Noninvasive Brain Stimulation–Induced PLP Relief Expressed as a Percentage

Treatment	Immediately after tDCS	End of Experimental Session	After > 6 Days
Sham	+42.9a	+28.3b	+1.2
Intervention	−6.1	−20.4a	−29.5c
PLP relief estimate (ie, intervention, considering sham)	−49	−48.7	−30.7

Percentage change was calculated using the raw PLP ratings (ie, before regressing out chronic PLP). A percentage change was calculated between the averaged pre‐ and post‐stimulation scores as follows: ([poststimulation PLP − prestimulation PLP] / prestimulation PLP) * 100. The table shows the PLP modulation in percentages for the sham and intervention conditions separately, as well as a further PLP relief effect size estimate (the intervention stimulation effect controlled for by the sham stimulation effect). We recognize that the intervention condition could both relieve PLP (with respect to baseline) and prevent PLP (with respect to the sham condition). Therefore, this PLP relief effect size estimate combines the intervention effect with the sham effect: That is, we added the effect size of the sham condition to the effect size of the intervention condition. Footnotes indicate significant PLP relief, as shown in Figure 1 and described in the Results section. Note that no statistical tests were carried out for the PLP relief estimate, and as such, no further notation of statistical significance is presented here.

^aCorrected p < 0.001; ^bcorrected p < 0.05; ^ccorrected p < 0.01.

PLP = phantom limb pain; tDCS = transcranial direct current stimulation.