THE INTERSECTION OF BRAIN SCIENCE & HUMAN POTENTIALPartner with us
neurofeedback.com
The newsletter
← Research & Evidence
Positive with limitationsPRISMA systematic review of individualized tACS experiments

Personalized Brain Stimulation based on Brain Oscillations: A Systematic Review of MEG- and EEG-informed Transcranial Alternating Current Stimulation (tACS).

A systematic review mapped 143 experiments that personalized tACS from EEG or MEG. Most individualized stimulation frequency, especially alpha, while relatively few personalized timing or electrode placement.

Sharifzadeh S, Jouzdani AF, Souki A, Brunoni AR, Marques DB, Ebrahimi M, Ghobadi-Azbari P, Pariz A, Soleimani G, Yavari F, Khosrowabadi R, Violante IR, Ekhtiari H.
Neuroscience and biobehavioral reviews · Publication date: 2026-09-20
Added to site: 2026-09-21
DOI: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2026.106991

Electronic publication date verified in Europe PMC.

Modalities
EEG, MEG, tACS, Personalized stimulation
Clinical focus
Brain oscillations, Closed-loop stimulation, Cognition
Population
Human EEG- or MEG-informed individualized tACS studies published through January 2024
Sample
78 publications comprising 143 experiments: 128 EEG-informed and 15 MEG-informed
Intervention / method
Individualized tACS frequency, timing or montage selected from participant-specific EEG or MEG measures
Comparator
Sham-controlled and active-control experiments were summarized separately

Clinician summary

Frequency-based individualization accounted for 93% of experiments. Significant positive outcomes were reported in 77.9% of sham-controlled experiments and 56.2% with active controls, a contrast that supports stronger active-control designs rather than proving a pooled treatment effect.

How to interpret the findings

The accessible abstract reports proportions of experiments with significant outcomes, not pooled effect sizes, risk-of-bias results or evidence certainty. Studies varied by population, outcome, control and parameter-selection method. The literature search ended in January 2024, so newer work was not included.

Equipment and disclosures

The review covered EEG- and MEG-informed tACS studies with varied recording and stimulation systems; individual manufacturers and devices were not itemized in the accessible abstract.

Funding and competing-interest details were not available in the checked indexed record.

Related evidence

Compare findings from the same clinical area, including mixed results.

Abstract checked · Checked 2026-09-21

Summary prepared with AI assistance. Source verification does not imply an independent replication or a clinician's endorsement. Read our review method.