Copyright
©The Author(s) 2025.
World J Psychiatry. Sep 19, 2025; 15(9): 107754
Published online Sep 19, 2025. doi: 10.5498/wjp.v15.i9.107754
Published online Sep 19, 2025. doi: 10.5498/wjp.v15.i9.107754
Table 1 Characteristics of the included studies
Ref. | Study design | Target region | Duration | Frequency | Concurrent task | Task | Task modality |
Alekseichuk et al[49], 2017 | Within subject | Frontoparietal | 18 | 6 | Online | N-back | Spatial |
Bender et al[35], 2019 | Within subject | Parietal | 4 | Online | Delayed match-to-sample task | Spatial | |
Biel et al[24], 2022 | Between-subject, within subject | Frontoparietal | 14 | 6 | Online | Delayed letter recognition task | Verbal |
Chander et al[50], 2016 | Between-subject | Frontoparietal | 4 | Personalized | Online | N-back | Verbal |
Debnath et al[36], 2024 | Within subject | Frontal | 20 | 5 | Online | Delayed match-to-sample task | Objective |
Draaisma et al[34], 2022 | Within subject | Frontoparietal | 30 | Personalized | Online | N-back | Objective |
Jaušovec and Jaušovec[25], 2014 | Within subject | Frontal, parietal | 15 | Personalized | Online | Visual-array comparison task | Objective |
Jaušovec et al[33], 2014 | Within subject | Frontal, parietal | 15 | Personalized | Online | N-back | Verbal |
Jones et al[51], 2019 | Within subject | Frontoparietal | 15 | 4.5 | Online | N-back | Objective |
Kleinert et al[40], 2017 | Within subject | Frontoparietal | 26 | 5 | Online | Delayed match-to-sample task | Spatial |
Ociepka et al[42], 2024 | Within subject | Parietal | 20 | 5.5 | Online | Antisaccade, recall, graph mapping task | Spatial |
Pahor and Jaušovec[32], 2017 | Within subject | Parietal, frontoparietal, frontal | 15 | Personalized | Offline | N-back | Verbal |
Röhner et al[37], 2018 | Within subject | Frontoparietal | 15 | 6 | Offline | N-back | Verbal |
Tseng et al[41], 2018 | Within subject | Parietal | 22 | 6 | Online | Change detection task | Spatial |
Violante et al[30], 2017 | Within subject | Frontoparietal | 26.5 | 6 | Online | N-back | Verbal |
Wolinski et al[31], 2018 | Within subject | Parietal | 12 | 4 | Online | Delayed match-to-sample task | Objective |
Xiao et al[29], 2023 | Within subject | Frontoparietal | 20 | 6 | Offline | Delayed match-to-sample task | Spatial |
Yang et al[28], 2024 | Within subject | Frontal | 16 | 5 | Offline | N-back | Spatial |
Zeng et al[52], 2022 | Between-subject | Frontal | 20 | 8 | Offline | N-back | Verbal |
Zhang et al[53], 2022 | Within subject | Frontoparietal | 25 | Personalized | Online | Spatial forward span task | Spatial |
Zhang et al[38], 2022 | Between-subject | Frontoparietal | 15 | 6 | Offline | N-back | Verbal |
Table 2 N-back subgroup analyses
Covariables | Subgroups | Number of effect sizes | Hedges’ g | 95%CI | I² (%) | τ² | P value |
Study design | 0.296 | ||||||
Within-subject | 33 | 0.260 | 0.136-0.386 | 57.20 | 0.079 | ||
Between-subject | 8 | 0.504 | 0.064-0.945 | 64.80 | 0.268 | ||
Target region | 0.681 | ||||||
Frontoparietal | 18 | 0.324 | 0.096-0.552 | 72.50 | 0.181 | ||
Parietal | 9 | 0.200 | -0.012 to 0.412 | 39.30 | 0.039 | ||
Frontal | 14 | 0.306 | 0.128-0.485 | 41.20 | 0.035 | ||
Frequency | 0.001 | ||||||
Fixed | 15 | 0.608 | 0.336-0.881 | 72.30 | 0.204 | ||
Personalized | 26 | 0.133 | 0.039-0.227 | 11.70 | < 0.001 | ||
Concurrent task | 0.014 | ||||||
Online | 15 | 0.490 | 0.239-0.742 | 67.3 | 0.167 | ||
Offline | 20 | 0.153 | 0.057-0.250 | 36.80 | 0.004 | ||
Load | 0.726 | ||||||
1 | 4 | 0.532 | -0.032 to 1.097 | 69.80 | 0.227 | ||
2 | 18 | 0.274 | 0.041-0.508 | 73.60 | 0.192 | ||
3 | 15 | 0.251 | 0.131-0.371 | 26.50 | < 0.001 | ||
4 | 2 | 0.549 | 0.005-1.094 | 21.60 | 0.033 | ||
5 | 2 | 0.187 | -0.283 to 0.657 | 0.00 | 0.000 | ||
Task modality | 0.005 | ||||||
Spatial | 3 | 1.168 | 0.529-1.807 | 77.90 | 0.245 | ||
Verbal | 36 | 0.189 | 0.096-0.281 | 35.40 | 0.014 | ||
Objective | 2 | 0.405 | 0.143-0.666 | 0.00 | 0.000 |
Table 3 Delayed match-to-sample task subgroup analyses
Covariables | Subgroups | Number of effect sizes | Hedges’ g | 95%CI | I² (%) | τ² | P value |
Study design | 0.564 | ||||||
Within-subject | 15 | 0.092 | -0.197 to 0.380 | 76.00 | 0.255 | ||
Between-subject | 2 | -0.090 | -0.636 to 0.456 | 0.00 | 0 | ||
Target region | 0.012 | ||||||
Frontoparietal | 10 | -0.082 | -0.490 to 0.326 | 78.10 | 0.346 | ||
Parietal | 3 | 0.574 | 0.277-0.871 | 0.00 | 0 | ||
Frontal | 4 | 0.077 | -0.173 to 0.328 | 0.00 | 0 | ||
Concurrent task | 0.295 | ||||||
Online | 15 | 0.105 | -0.185 to 0.395 | 75.40 | 0.252 | ||
Offline | 2 | -0.168 | -0.588 to 0.253 | 0.00 | 0 | ||
Task modality | 0.433 | ||||||
Spatial | 7 | 0.005 | -0.642 to 0.652 | 87.60 | 0.680 | ||
Verbal | 4 | 0.020 | -0.241 to 0.280 | 0.00 | 0 | ||
Objective | 6 | 0.226 | 0.022-0.430 | 0.00 | 0 |
- Citation: Hou TY, Mao XF, Zhang RK. Effect of theta-transcranial alternating current stimulation on working memory performance among healthy adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis. World J Psychiatry 2025; 15(9): 107754
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/2220-3206/full/v15/i9/107754.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.5498/wjp.v15.i9.107754