Related Experiment Video
Updated: Oct 17, 2026
Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation and Simultaneous Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Published on: April 27, 2014
Effects of transcranial direct current stimulation on basketball shooting accuracy: a systematic review and
Yue Li1, Xiao Lu Yuan2, Shuairan Li3
1School of Physical Education and Sports, Shenzhen University of Information Technology, Shenzhen, Guangdong, China.
Background:
Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), a form of transcranial electrical stimulation, has been investigated as a method to enhance motor performance in sports. However, findings regarding its effects specifically on basketball shooting accuracy remain inconsistent. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to clarify the effects of tDCS on basketball shooting performance by synthesizing evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs).
Methods:
Following PRISMA guidelines and a pre-registered protocol (PROSPERO CRD420251066350), a comprehensive literature search was conducted across PubMed, Web of Science, EBSCO, Scopus, and CNKI. Search terms included "transcranial direct current stimulation," "tDCS," "basketball," and "shooting accuracy." Eligible studies were RCTs evaluating tDCS (anodal or cathodal) vs. sham stimulation in basketball players and reporting shooting accuracy outcomes. Two reviewers independently screened studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. Meta-analysis was performed using a fixed-effect model when appropriate.
Results:
The pooled analysis revealed a moderate, statistically significant effect of tDCS on improving basketball shooting accuracy [pooled standardized mean difference [SMD] = 0.67, 95% confidence interval [CI] [0.43, 0.92], p < 0.001]. There was no significant heterogeneity among studies (Q test p = 0.288 , I 2 = 17.9%), indicating no detectable between-study heterogeneity. All included studies reported improvements in shooting performance favoring tDCS over sham, though effect sizes varied. Subgroup analyses showed that the positive effect of tDCS showed beneficial effects across different shooting tasks (free throws vs. field goals), participant characteristics (including age, sex, and skill level), and stimulation parameters (current intensity: 1-2 mA; single-session vs. multi-session protocols), with no subgroup differences reaching statistical significance. Risk-of-bias assessment indicated that most studies were of moderate quality, with some limitations related to blinding and sample size.
Conclusions:
This meta-analysis presents a novel quantitative synthesis of existing trial evidence examining the effects of tDCS on basketball shooting performance. These preliminary findings suggest that tDCS warrants further investigation as a potential neuromodulation technique for shooting-precision training; however, given the generally small sample sizes and short follow-up durations characterizing the current evidence base, any practical application remains premature. Future research incorporating larger, ecologically valid, and longer-term study designs is needed to confirm the durability of tDCS-related benefits and to establish optimal stimulation protocols before this approach can be responsibly translated into athletic training practice.
Systematic Review Registration:
https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420251066350, identifier CRD420251066350.
