The best-supported ADHD treatment in Birmingham, Alabama is the same as anywhere: FDA-approved medication managed by a prescriber, behavioral parent training or skills-focused therapy, and real supports at school or work, combined differently at different ages. qEEG brain mapping and neurofeedback, which Peak Neuroscience provides inside our Hoover office, are optional add-ons. In blinded trials, most of neurofeedback’s apparent benefit disappears.

An earlier version of this page was titled “The Future of ADHD Treatment,” said that “studies have shown significant improvements” from brain-map-guided neurostimulation, and named none of them. We went looking. The studies we found say something more useful, and this article uses one yardstick throughout: does a treatment still look good when the person rating the symptoms cannot tell who got the real thing? By that test, medication and behavioral skills training lead, and the brain-based technologies trail. The second lesson is psychological. In a large double-blind neurofeedback trial, children who received a convincing sham improved about as much as children who received the real training. Some of that shared improvement is the natural ebb of symptoms and the hopes of the people doing the rating, and some of it is what any structured program supplies: attention, regular appointments and the expectation of change. Good ADHD care uses those ingredients on purpose instead of crediting them to a machine.

What the strongest evidence supports

ADHD is common. In the 2022 National Survey of Children’s Health, about 1 in 9 American children (11.4 percent, roughly 7.1 million) had ever been diagnosed, and nearly a third of children with current ADHD were getting no ADHD-specific treatment at all.¹ Among adults aged 18 to 44, a national survey estimated current ADHD at 4.4 percent, and most of those adults were untreated.²

For children and teenagers, the American Academy of Pediatrics 2019 guideline sets the standard, and it changes with age.³ For preschoolers aged 4 and 5, the first-line treatment is behavioral parent training and/or behavioral classroom intervention, with methylphenidate considered only if those do not help enough. From age 6 until the 12th birthday, the guideline recommends FDA-approved medication together with parent training and/or classroom behavioral intervention, preferably both. For adolescents it recommends medication with the teenager’s assent, plus training or behavioral interventions where they are available. For school-age children and teenagers, educational interventions and supports, which often include an Individualized Education Program (IEP) or a 504 plan, are described as a necessary part of any treatment plan, not an extra.

Medication has the deepest pool of double-blind evidence. A 2018 network meta-analysis of 133 double-blind trials found that every medication it included beat placebo on clinicians’ ratings of children’s core symptoms. Weighing benefit against side effects, it supported methylphenidate in children and adolescents and amphetamines in adults as preferred first choices for short-term treatment, and it noted how little long-term trial data exist.⁴ The landmark MTA study randomized 579 children aged 7 to 9.9 years to fourteen months of careful medication management, intensive behavioral treatment, the two combined, or ordinary community care. For core ADHD symptoms, medication management beat behavioral treatment and community care. The combination never differed significantly from medication alone in direct comparisons. On a few other outcomes (oppositional and aggressive behavior, internalizing symptoms such as anxiety, teacher-rated social skills, parent-child relations and reading), only the combined arm beat behavioral treatment or community care, which the authors read as a possible modest advantage.⁵

Medication decisions belong with a prescriber: a pediatrician, psychiatrist, family physician or nurse practitioner. Therapists do not prescribe, and nothing on this page is advice about starting, changing or stopping a medication.

For adults, cognitive behavioral therapy is the best-studied talk therapy. In a 2010 trial published in JAMA, 86 adults who were already taking medication but still had significant symptoms received twelve sessions of either CBT or relaxation training with educational support. Assessors who did not know the assignments rated the CBT group’s symptoms lower; 53 percent of the CBT group responded on a global measure, against 23 percent of the comparison group, and the gains held at twelve months.⁶ A 2018 Cochrane review of 14 trials concluded that CBT may help adults with ADHD in the short term, including with the depression and anxiety that often travel with it, but rated the evidence as low quality.⁷

Why blinded ratings are the honest test

Most ADHD outcomes are ratings, usually by a parent, a teacher or the patient. A parent who drove to forty sessions, paid for them and hoped they would work is not a neutral rater. Researchers handle this by separating “most proximal” ratings, made by people close to the treatment, from “probably blinded” ratings, made by people who do not know who received what.

A 2013 European meta-analysis applied that split to non-drug treatments.⁸ With proximal raters, every dietary and psychological treatment it examined looked effective. With probably blinded raters, only two held up: fatty acid supplementation, with a small effect, and removal of artificial food colors, with a larger effect, often in children selected for food sensitivities. Behavioral interventions, neurofeedback, cognitive training and restrictive elimination diets all dropped to non-significant levels. Any supplement or diet change is a conversation to have with your child’s pediatrician or your own prescriber first.

That result humbles therapists too, and it deserves a fair reading. A follow-up meta-analysis found that behavioral interventions still improved parenting and reduced children’s conduct problems on blinded measures, even though blinded ADHD symptom ratings did not move.⁹ Parent training earns its place by changing the household: fewer standoffs, more consistent consequences, a parent who feels competent again. The question for neurofeedback is whether it shows a comparable blinded benefit anywhere. So far the answer is small and narrow.

Brain mapping and neurofeedback for ADHD: what the trials show

A qEEG starts as an ordinary EEG recording and compares your brain’s electrical activity with a database of people your age. The old version of this post said a map could “pinpoint the areas of the brain” causing ADHD. It cannot. For years the best-known ADHD marker was a high ratio of slow theta waves to faster beta waves. A 2013 meta-analysis of nine studies, covering 1,253 young people with ADHD and 517 without, found the gap between groups shrinking over the years and concluded that the ratio is not a reliable diagnostic measure, though a subgroup of people with ADHD do show it and it may help predict treatment response.¹⁰ Diagnosis remains clinical. The AAP guideline requires DSM-5 criteria, with symptoms and impairment in more than one setting, documented by parents, teachers and other people who know the child.³ Our article on what a qEEG brain map can and cannot tell you covers the measurement itself in more detail.

Neurofeedback rewards brain activity in real time as it moves toward a target pattern, usually through a game or video on a screen. Early reviews were enthusiastic: a 2009 meta-analysis judged neurofeedback for ADHD “efficacious and specific,” with large effects on inattention and impulsivity.¹¹ That review is still the one our brain mapping service page cites. Stricter work since then tells a different story. A 2016 meta-analysis of 13 randomized trials found effects only on the least blinded ratings, not on probably blinded ratings and not in trials with sham or active controls.¹² In 2021 a two-site trial randomized 144 children aged 7 to 10, all with a high theta/beta ratio, to real theta/beta training or a sham built from prerecorded EEG. Blinding held. Both groups improved a great deal, and they did not differ at the end of treatment or thirteen months later; 61 percent of the neurofeedback group and 54 percent of the sham group were rated responders. One secondary finding pointed the other way: the neurofeedback group was taking less medication at follow-up.¹³ A 2025 meta-analysis of 38 randomized trials and 2,472 participants aged 5 to 40 found no significant improvement on probably blinded ratings of total ADHD symptoms. It found a small effect when the analysis was limited to standard protocols, and a small gain in processing speed.¹⁴ The AAP guideline lists EEG biofeedback among treatments with too little evidence to recommend.³

What about mapping first and choosing the protocol from the map? That is how Peak Neuroscience works, and the main published support for it comes from studies involving one research group, Martijn Arns and colleagues. An open-label pilot treated 21 people with qEEG-informed neurofeedback in 2012, and a 2020 multicenter study reported similar results in 114 patients who also received coaching and sleep-hygiene advice; 70 percent had at least a 50 percent drop in symptoms and 55 percent reached remission.^{15, 16} Neither study had a control group, so neither can separate the protocol from the coaching, better sleep, expectation or the passage of time. The pilot’s own authors wrote that their results needed replication in controlled studies. We have not found a sham-controlled trial showing that map-guided neurofeedback beats standard neurofeedback or a convincing sham for ADHD.

Where does that leave neurofeedback? It is low-risk and reasonable to try as an add-on for a family or adult who has the time and money, has the evidence-based foundation in place, and goes in with clear eyes. It is not a replacement for medication, parent training or school supports, and no one can honestly promise a set number of sessions to a lasting fix.

Neurostimulation for ADHD: TMS, tDCS and trigeminal nerve stimulation

The old post said that transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) “offer a non-invasive alternative to medication for treating ADHD,” and that Taproot used both to target regions found on the map. Neither claim holds. TMS uses a magnetic coil strong enough to make cortical neurons fire. It is prescribed and supervised by physicians, and it has no FDA clearance for ADHD. The neurostimulation available in our Hoover office is low-intensity stimulation from Peak Neuroscience, not TMS.

The research on brain stimulation for ADHD is small and split. A 2021 systematic review of 18 rTMS and tDCS studies, with 311 children and adults, found little evidence of clinical improvement, and its meta-analysis of the tDCS studies found only trend-level effects on inhibition and processing speed. Its authors concluded that the findings did not yet support rTMS or tDCS of the prefrontal cortex as an alternative ADHD treatment.¹⁷ The largest tDCS trial in adolescent boys with ADHD at the time randomized 50 boys aged 10 to 18 to fifteen sessions of real or sham tDCS, each combined with cognitive training, and found no benefit; the sham group actually ended with lower symptom ratings.¹⁸ On the other side, a 2022 trial of 64 adults who were not taking stimulants found that thirty minutes a day of home tDCS for four weeks reduced inattention compared with sham. Mild side effects, including skin redness, headache and scalp burns, were more common with active stimulation.¹⁹ One positive four-week trial in adults is a reason for more research, not a basis for promising results.

Trigeminal nerve stimulation is the cautionary tale. A small device sends a mild current through electrodes on the forehead while a child sleeps. In 2019 the FDA authorized it as the first device-based treatment for ADHD, on the strength of a 62-child pilot trial.^{20, 21} That same year the AAP said the evidence was too sparse to recommend it.³ In 2026 a confirmatory multicenter trial randomized 150 children and adolescents to real or sham stimulation every night for four weeks and found no difference in ADHD symptoms. Its authors concluded that the device is safe but does not show clinical efficacy for pediatric ADHD.²¹ A larger trial of 218 children from the team behind the original pilot, posted as a preprint in October 2026, reported that strong improvement in its low-frequency control group blunted differences on the standard symptom scales, but found a higher clinician-rated response rate with active stimulation, 35 percent against 15 percent. It has not yet been peer reviewed.²²

Low-intensity electrical stimulation has a good safety record when standard limits are kept. A 2017 international consensus review counted no serious adverse events across more than 18,000 sessions; prickling, headache and fatigue were the usual complaints, and skin burns from poor electrode contact were rare.²³ Safety is not efficacy, though. For ADHD, none of these stimulation methods has the blinded evidence to stand in for medication or behavioral treatment.

What this looks like in therapy

Many adults come to therapy with a diagnosis that came late, after decades of being called lazy, careless or “not living up to potential.” The diagnosis often brings relief and grief at once: relief that there is a reason, grief for the grades, jobs and relationships that went sideways while nobody knew. That grief is real therapeutic material, and so is the shame underneath it. Shame drives avoidance, and avoidance makes every ADHD problem worse. A treatment that promises to find the “root cause” on a screen can be appealing for the same reason. It offers a story in which the problem was never the person.

Therapy for ADHD is practical before it is anything else. CBT-based work builds outside structure (calendars, lists, tasks broken into small steps, a workspace arranged so the right action is the easy one) and works on the thoughts that keep people stuck, along with the anxiety, low mood and battered self-esteem that years of struggling leave behind.⁷ Co-occurring problems are the rule rather than the exception. More than three quarters of American children with current ADHD have at least one co-occurring condition,¹ and adult ADHD overlaps heavily with other mental health and substance problems.² Trauma can mimic or magnify attention problems, which we untangle in our article on how PTSD and ADHD overlap. When a child’s defiance is the main fight at home, our guide to understanding and managing oppositional defiant disorder is a useful companion.

For families, the work usually centers on the household: how instructions are given, what happens after a meltdown, how two parents stay on the same page, how a teenager earns more independence. If your child is under 12, ask any therapist you are considering whether they deliver structured behavioral parent training, because that is the version with research behind it. Our list of family therapy and parenting resources in the Birmingham-Hoover metro is a place to look, and our child and teen therapy page explains how we work with school-age kids and their parents.

Brain-based tools can fit into this work. Some people find that seeing a map, or watching a neurofeedback screen respond, helps them treat attention as something trainable rather than a moral failing. That shift is worth something. The risk is the opposite story: my brain is broken, and a machine will fix it. In therapy we treat a map as one piece of information next to your history, your relationships and what actually happens on a Tuesday afternoon when the email needs answering. We track the outcomes that matter to you, such as sleep, grades, missed deadlines and arguments at home, rather than the map alone.

Getting ADHD care in Birmingham and Hoover

Start with an evaluation if you have not had one. For children, that usually means the pediatrician, who under the AAP guideline should gather information from parents and teachers and screen for other conditions, or a child psychiatrist or psychologist when the picture is complicated.³ Adults can be evaluated by a psychiatrist, a psychologist or a primary care clinician. A brain map is not a substitute for that evaluation.

Bring the school in. ADHD can qualify a student for a 504 plan, or for special education under the “other health impairment” category of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act when it impairs learning. School districts make those eligibility decisions, and they vary from district to district.³ That holds in Hoover, Vestavia Hills, Mountain Brook, Jefferson County, Shelby County and every other Alabama system, so put your requests in writing and keep copies. College students at UAB, Samford and other campuses can request accommodations through campus disability services; our article on support systems for college students covers that side.

At Taproot, therapy for ADHD and AuDHD (ADHD with autism) happens in our Hoover office, off I-65 at the Riverchase exit and about fifteen minutes from downtown Birmingham, or by video anywhere in Alabama. Brain mapping, neurofeedback and neurostimulation are provided inside the office by Peak Neuroscience, the practice of Dr. Jason Mishalanie, a licensed psychologist who is board certified in neurofeedback. EEG analyst Diana Pizarro analyzes each map. The recording takes about an hour, with a cap of electrodes, eyes open and then eyes closed, and nothing is sent into the brain while it records. Training sessions happen in the office, with a re-map partway through to check for change. These services are billed separately from therapy and quoted on a free 15-minute intake call. If you live outside the metro, you can make one trip to Hoover for a brain map and continue therapy by video.

Before paying for neurofeedback or neurostimulation anywhere, ask a few questions. Is it being added to evaluation, a conversation with a prescriber and school or work supports, or offered instead of them? Which outcomes will be tracked besides the map, and who will rate them? What happens if nothing has changed after a set number of sessions? Will the provider tell you plainly that a map does not diagnose ADHD? Be wary of anyone who promises a cure, guarantees permanent change in a fixed number of sessions, or suggests stopping medication. If you or someone in your family is in crisis, call or text 988.

If you are in the Birmingham area and want help sorting out the next step, whether that is therapy for an adult with ADHD, support for a family, or an honest conversation about whether a brain map would add anything, start with our ADHD and AuDHD page or contact us for a free 15-minute call. We will tell you what we think is worth trying first, including when the better first call is a prescriber or the school.

References

1. Danielson, M. L., Claussen, A. H., Bitsko, R. H., Katz, S. M., Newsome, K., Blumberg, S. J., Kogan, M. D., & Ghandour, R. (2024). ADHD prevalence among U.S. children and adolescents in 2022: Diagnosis, severity, co-occurring disorders, and treatment. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, 53(3), 343–360. https://doi.org/10.1080/15374416.2024.2335625
2. Kessler, R. C., Adler, L., Barkley, R., Biederman, J., Conners, C. K., Demler, O., Faraone, S. V., Greenhill, L. L., Howes, M. J., Secnik, K., Spencer, T., Ustun, T. B., Walters, E. E., & Zaslavsky, A. M. (2006). The prevalence and correlates of adult ADHD in the United States: Results from the National Comorbidity Survey Replication. American Journal of Psychiatry, 163(4), 716–723. https://doi.org/10.1176/ajp.2006.163.4.716
3. Wolraich, M. L., Hagan, J. F., Jr., Allan, C., Chan, E., Davison, D., Earls, M., Evans, S. W., Flinn, S. K., Froehlich, T., Frost, J., Holbrook, J. R., Lehmann, C. U., Lessin, H. R., Okechukwu, K., Pierce, K. L., Winner, J. D., Zurhellen, W., & Subcommittee on Children and Adolescents with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactive Disorder. (2019). Clinical practice guideline for the diagnosis, evaluation, and treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in children and adolescents. Pediatrics, 144(4), e20192528. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2019-2528
4. Cortese, S., Adamo, N., Del Giovane, C., Mohr-Jensen, C., Hayes, A. J., Carucci, S., Atkinson, L. Z., Tessari, L., Banaschewski, T., Coghill, D., Hollis, C., Simonoff, E., Zuddas, A., Barbui, C., Purgato, M., Steinhausen, H.-C., Shokraneh, F., Xia, J., & Cipriani, A. (2018). Comparative efficacy and tolerability of medications for attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder in children, adolescents, and adults: A systematic review and network meta-analysis. The Lancet Psychiatry, 5(9), 727–738. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2215-0366(18)30269-4
5. MTA Cooperative Group. (1999). A 14-month randomized clinical trial of treatment strategies for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Archives of General Psychiatry, 56(12), 1073–1086. https://doi.org/10.1001/archpsyc.56.12.1073
6. Safren, S. A., Sprich, S., Mimiaga, M. J., Surman, C., Knouse, L., Groves, M., & Otto, M. W. (2010). Cognitive behavioral therapy vs relaxation with educational support for medication-treated adults with ADHD and persistent symptoms: A randomized controlled trial. JAMA, 304(8), 875–880. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2010.1192
7. Lopez, P. L., Torrente, F. M., Ciapponi, A., Lischinsky, A. G., Cetkovich-Bakmas, M., Rojas, J. I., Romano, M., & Manes, F. F. (2018). Cognitive-behavioural interventions for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in adults. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2018(3), CD010840. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD010840.pub2
8. Sonuga-Barke, E. J. S., Brandeis, D., Cortese, S., Daley, D., Ferrin, M., Holtmann, M., Stevenson, J., Danckaerts, M., van der Oord, S., Döpfner, M., Dittmann, R. W., Simonoff, E., Zuddas, A., Banaschewski, T., Buitelaar, J., Coghill, D., Hollis, C., Konofal, E., Lecendreux, M., . . . European ADHD Guidelines Group. (2013). Nonpharmacological interventions for ADHD: Systematic review and meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials of dietary and psychological treatments. American Journal of Psychiatry, 170(3), 275–289. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ajp.2012.12070991
9. Daley, D., van der Oord, S., Ferrin, M., Danckaerts, M., Doepfner, M., Cortese, S., & Sonuga-Barke, E. J. S. (2014). Behavioral interventions in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials across multiple outcome domains. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 53(8), 835–847. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaac.2014.05.013
10. Arns, M., Conners, C. K., & Kraemer, H. C. (2013). A decade of EEG theta/beta ratio research in ADHD: A meta-analysis. Journal of Attention Disorders, 17(5), 374–383. https://doi.org/10.1177/1087054712460087
11. Arns, M., de Ridder, S., Strehl, U., Breteler, M., & Coenen, A. (2009). Efficacy of neurofeedback treatment in ADHD: The effects on inattention, impulsivity and hyperactivity: A meta-analysis. Clinical EEG and Neuroscience, 40(3), 180–189. https://doi.org/10.1177/155005940904000311
12. Cortese, S., Ferrin, M., Brandeis, D., Holtmann, M., Aggensteiner, P., Daley, D., Santosh, P., Simonoff, E., Stevenson, J., Stringaris, A., Sonuga-Barke, E. J. S., & European ADHD Guidelines Group. (2016). Neurofeedback for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: Meta-analysis of clinical and neuropsychological outcomes from randomized controlled trials. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 55(6), 444–455. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaac.2016.03.007
13. Neurofeedback Collaborative Group. (2021). Double-blind placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial of neurofeedback for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder with 13-month follow-up. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 60(7), 841–855. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaac.2020.07.906
14. Westwood, S. J., Aggensteiner, P.-M., Kaiser, A., Nagy, P., Donno, F., Merkl, D., Balia, C., Goujon, A., Bousquet, E., Capodiferro, A. M., Derks, L., Purper-Ouakil, D., Carucci, S., Holtmann, M., Brandeis, D., Cortese, S., Sonuga-Barke, E. J. S., & European ADHD Guidelines Group. (2025). Neurofeedback for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: A systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Psychiatry, 82(2), 118–129. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2024.3702
15. Arns, M., Drinkenburg, W., & Kenemans, J. L. (2012). The effects of QEEG-informed neurofeedback in ADHD: An open-label pilot study. Applied Psychophysiology and Biofeedback, 37(3), 171–180. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10484-012-9191-4
16. Krepel, N., Egtberts, T., Sack, A. T., Heinrich, H., Ryan, M., & Arns, M. (2020). A multicenter effectiveness trial of QEEG-informed neurofeedback in ADHD: Replication and treatment prediction. NeuroImage: Clinical, 28, 102399. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nicl.2020.102399
17. Westwood, S. J., Radua, J., & Rubia, K. (2021). Noninvasive brain stimulation in children and adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Psychiatry and Neuroscience, 46(1), E14–E33. https://doi.org/10.1503/jpn.190179
18. Westwood, S. J., Criaud, M., Lam, S.-L., Lukito, S., Wallace-Hanlon, S., Kowalczyk, O. S., Kostara, A., Mathew, J., Agbedjro, D., Wexler, B. E., Cohen Kadosh, R., Asherson, P., & Rubia, K. (2023). Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) combined with cognitive training in adolescent boys with ADHD: A double-blind, randomised, sham-controlled trial. Psychological Medicine, 53(2), 497–512. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291721001859
19. Leffa, D. T., Grevet, E. H., Bau, C. H. D., Schneider, M., Ferrazza, C. P., da Silva, R. F., Miranda, M. S., Picon, F., Teche, S. P., Sanches, P., Pereira, D., Rubia, K., Brunoni, A. R., Camprodon, J. A., Caumo, W., & Rohde, L. A. (2022). Transcranial direct current stimulation vs sham for the treatment of inattention in adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: The TUNED randomized clinical trial. JAMA Psychiatry, 79(9), 847–856. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2022.2055
20. McGough, J. J., Sturm, A., Cowen, J., Tung, K., Salgari, G. C., Leuchter, A. F., Cook, I. A., Sugar, C. A., & Loo, S. K. (2019). Double-blind, sham-controlled, pilot study of trigeminal nerve stimulation for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 58(4), 403–411. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaac.2018.11.013
21. Conti, A. A., Bozhilova, N., Eraydin, I. E., Stringer, D., Johansson, L., Marhenke, R., Bilbow, A., El Masri, S., Hyde, J., Giaroli, G., Liang, H., Fiori, F., Mehta, M. A., Santosh, P., Carter, B., Cortese, S., & Rubia, K. (2026). External trigeminal nerve stimulation in youth with ADHD: A randomized, sham-controlled, phase 2b trial. Nature Medicine, 32(2), 582–590. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-025-04075-x
22. Loo, S., Dillon, A., Salgari, G., Stiles, K., Cowen, J., Chang, S., Sugar, C., McGough, J., & Whelan, F. (2026). Clinical efficacy of trigeminal nerve stimulation in pediatric ADHD: A double-blind randomized controlled trial (Preprint, not peer reviewed). Research Square. https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-11461111/v1
23. Antal, A., Alekseichuk, I., Bikson, M., Brockmöller, J., Brunoni, A. R., Chen, R., Cohen, L. G., Dowthwaite, G., Ellrich, J., Flöel, A., Fregni, F., George, M. S., Hamilton, R., Haueisen, J., Herrmann, C. S., Hummel, F. C., Lefaucheur, J. P., Liebetanz, D., Loo, C. K., . . . Paulus, W. (2017). Low intensity transcranial electric stimulation: Safety, ethical, legal regulatory and application guidelines. Clinical Neurophysiology, 128(9), 1774–1809. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinph.2017.06.001