Correction to: J NeuroEng Rehabil

https://doi.org/10.1186/s12984-019-0562-4

In the original article [1], we mentioned that some study characteristics of the article by Dagan and colleagues [2] were unavailable. However, we realized that the authors provided the relevant information in their supplementary file. As such, we added participant characteristics (i.e., age = 68.8 ± 6.8, gender = 17 M, 3 F, PD duration = 9.0 ± 5.7, and UPDRS Part III at baseline = Total 39.7 ± 14.6) to Table 1, stimulation parameters (i.e., intensity = 3 mA, duration = 20 min, areas = 3 cm2) to Table 2, and methodological quality assessments (i.e., allocation concealment = 1 and Total score = 9) to Table 3. Based on the new information, we updated Fig. 2 with the corrected selection bias and performance bias results. Finally, we confirmed that these corrections did not change the meta-analytic findings in the original article.

Table 1 Participant characteristics
Table 2 tDCS protocols
Table. 3 PEDro score for methodological quality assessment
Fig. 2
figure 1

Cochrane risk of bias assessment. a Risk of bias summary and b Risk of bias graph