Journal of Advanced Biomedical Sciences
JABS
Sun, Feb 22, 2026
[Archive]
Volume 16, Issue 1 (1-2026)
J Adv Biomed Sci. 2026, 16(1): 70-81 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Poursaeid V, Tabatabaei S M. Effects of Anodal Prefrontal tDCS on Behavioral Symptoms and Cognitive Flexibility in Children with Learning Disabilities: A Quasi-Experimental Study. J Adv Biomed Sci. 2026; 16 (1) :70-81
URL: http://jabs.fums.ac.ir/article-1-3191-en.html
URL: http://jabs.fums.ac.ir/article-1-3191-en.html
1- Department of Clinical Psychology, TaMS.C., Islamic Azad University, Tabriz, Iran
2- Department of Medical Physiology, TaMS.C., Islamic Azad University, Tabriz, Iran ,smt@iaut.ac.ir
2- Department of Medical Physiology, TaMS.C., Islamic Azad University, Tabriz, Iran ,
Abstract: (147 Views)
Background & Objective: This study examined the effectiveness of transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) applied to the prefrontal cortex in enhancing behavioral symptoms and cognitive flexibility among children with learning disabilities (LD).
Materials & Methods: A quasi-experimental pre-test–post-test design was adopted. The statistical population comprised all students with learning disabilities in Tabriz during the 1402–1403 academic year. Using purposive sampling, 30 students were selected and randomly allocated to experimental and control groups. Data were collected using the Stroop Test, the Achenbach Behavioral Problems Test (parent version), and a tDCS stimulation device. For the intervention, a 1.5 mA direct current was delivered across ten 20-minute sessions, with a 5 × 5 cm² anodal electrode positioned at F3 and a 5 × 7 cm² cathodal electrode placed at Fp2, both administering the same 1.5 mA current. Data were analyzed using multivariate analysis of covariance (MANCOVA) in SPSS.
Results: Significant improvements were found in internalizing behavioral problems (F = 91.39, p < 0.001, η² = 0.76), externalizing behavioral problems (F = 29.75, p < 0.001, η² = 0.51), and cognitive flexibility (F = 39.80, p < 0.001, η² = 0.58). These findings extend the application of tDCS to behavioral outcomes in children with learning disabilities, a population less frequently examined with respect to prefrontal stimulation compared to children with dyslexia, for whom reading-focused interventions are more common.
Conclusion: This non-invasive intervention appears promising as an adjunct to cognitive-behavioral therapies aimed at improving behavioral and cognitive symptoms in children with learning disabilities. The moderate-to-large effect sizes underscore its potential clinical significance. However, the absence of a sham control group, the small sample size (n = 30), and the lack of long-term follow-up assessments require caution when interpreting the causal implications and generalizing the findings.
Materials & Methods: A quasi-experimental pre-test–post-test design was adopted. The statistical population comprised all students with learning disabilities in Tabriz during the 1402–1403 academic year. Using purposive sampling, 30 students were selected and randomly allocated to experimental and control groups. Data were collected using the Stroop Test, the Achenbach Behavioral Problems Test (parent version), and a tDCS stimulation device. For the intervention, a 1.5 mA direct current was delivered across ten 20-minute sessions, with a 5 × 5 cm² anodal electrode positioned at F3 and a 5 × 7 cm² cathodal electrode placed at Fp2, both administering the same 1.5 mA current. Data were analyzed using multivariate analysis of covariance (MANCOVA) in SPSS.
Results: Significant improvements were found in internalizing behavioral problems (F = 91.39, p < 0.001, η² = 0.76), externalizing behavioral problems (F = 29.75, p < 0.001, η² = 0.51), and cognitive flexibility (F = 39.80, p < 0.001, η² = 0.58). These findings extend the application of tDCS to behavioral outcomes in children with learning disabilities, a population less frequently examined with respect to prefrontal stimulation compared to children with dyslexia, for whom reading-focused interventions are more common.
Conclusion: This non-invasive intervention appears promising as an adjunct to cognitive-behavioral therapies aimed at improving behavioral and cognitive symptoms in children with learning disabilities. The moderate-to-large effect sizes underscore its potential clinical significance. However, the absence of a sham control group, the small sample size (n = 30), and the lack of long-term follow-up assessments require caution when interpreting the causal implications and generalizing the findings.
Keywords: transcranial Direct Current Stimulation, dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC), Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL), cognitive flexibility, learning disabilities
Type of Study: Research |
Subject:
Cognitive Neuroscience
Received: 2025/10/7 | Revised: 2026/01/21 | Accepted: 2025/11/12 | Published: 2026/01/21
Received: 2025/10/7 | Revised: 2026/01/21 | Accepted: 2025/11/12 | Published: 2026/01/21
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons — Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0)