Nejati, Vahid and Vaziri, Zahra and Antal, Andrea and Antonenko, Daria and Behroozmand, Roozbeh and Bestmann, Sven and Brunelin, Jerome and Brunoni, Andre R. and Carvalho, Sandra and Davis, Nick J. and Enticott, Peter G. and Fallgatter, Andreas J. and Ferrucci, Roberta and Fitzgerald, Paul B. and Hamada, Masashi and Hamilton, Roy H. and Hoy, Kate E. and Jaberzadeh, Shapour and Jamil, Asif and Cohen Kadosh, Roi and Krekelberg, Bart and Laureys, Steven and Romero Lauro, Leonor J. and Loo, Colleen K. and Martin, Donel and Martinotti, Giovanni and Mondino, Marine and Oliviero, Antonio and Pellicciari, Maria Concetta and Plewnia, Christian and Pobric, Gorana and De Raedt, Rudi and Razza, Lais B. and Rocchi, Lorenzo and Salehinejad, Mohammad Ali and Khorrami, Azin Sarraj and Schecklmann, Martin and Siebner, Hartwig Roman and Taylor, Stephan F. and Vanderhasselt, Marie-Anne and Vanneste, Sven and Vicario, Carmelo M. and Woods, Adam J. and Ziemann, Ulf and Nitsche, Michael A. (2026) Report Approval for Transcranial Electrical Stimulation (RATES): expert recommendation based on a Delphi consensus study. NATURE PROTOCOLS, 21. pp. 2400-2412. ISSN 1754-2189, 1750-2799
Full text not available from this repository. (Request a copy)Abstract
Transcranial electrical stimulation (tES) has gained substantial momentum as a research and therapeutic tool; however, it suffers from challenges related to reproducibility and quality assessment due to the absence of standardized reporting practices. Here we aim to develop a comprehensive and consensus-based checklist for conducting and reporting tES studies to enhance the quality of research and reports. In this Consensus Statement, we used a Delphi approach conducted across three rounds and involving 38 experts to identify crucial elements required to report in tES studies. This consensus-driven approach included the evaluation of the interquartile deviation (>1.00), the percentage of positive responses (above 60%) and mean importance ratings (<3), hence ensuring the creation of a robust and well-balanced checklist. These metrics were utilized to assess both the consensus reached and importance ratings for each item. Consensus was reached, leading to the retention of 66 out of the initial 70 items. These items were categorized into five groups: participants (12 items), stimulation device (9 items), electrodes (12 items), current (12 items) and procedure (25 items). We then distilled a shorter version of the checklist, which includes the 26 items deemed essential. The Report Approval for Transcranial Electrical Stimulation (RATES) checklist is relevant to those carrying out and assessing tES studies, as it provides a structured framework for researchers to consider and report. For reviewers, it can serve as a tool to assess completeness, comprehensiveness and transparency of reports. In addition, the RATES checklist aims to promote a deeper understanding of tES and facilitates comparisons between studies within the field. Overall, the RATES checklist provides a shared reference point that may improve research quality, foster harmonization in reporting and, ultimately, enhance the interpretability and reproducibility of findings in both research and clinical contexts.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED-TRIALS; HUMAN MOTOR CORTEX; CORTICAL EXCITABILITY; MAGNETIC STIMULATION; BRAIN-STIMULATION; TDCS; CHECKLIST; INTENSITY; QUALITY; GUIDELINES |
| Subjects: | 600 Technology > 610 Medical sciences Medicine |
| Divisions: | Medicine > Lehrstuhl für Psychiatrie und Psychotherapie |
| Depositing User: | Dr. Gernot Deinzer |
| Date Deposited: | 24 Jun 2026 06:36 |
| Last Modified: | 24 Jun 2026 06:36 |
| URI: | https://pred.uni-regensburg.de/id/eprint/68083 |
Actions (login required)
 |
View Item |
