| Title |
Effects of a common transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) protocol on motor evoked potentials found to be highly variable within individuals over 9 testing sessions
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Experimental Brain Research, May 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00221-016-4667-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jared Cooney Horvath, Simon J. Vogrin, Olivia Carter, Mark J. Cook, Jason D. Forte |
| Abstract |
Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) uses a weak electric current to modulate neuronal activity. A neurophysiologic outcome measure to demonstrate reliable tDCS modulation at the group level is transcranial magnetic stimulation engendered motor evoked potentials (MEPs). Here, we conduct a study testing the reliability of individual MEP response patterns following a common tDCS protocol. Fourteen participants (7m/7f) each underwent nine randomized sessions of 1 mA, 10 min tDCS (3 anode; 3 cathode; 3 sham) delivered using an M1/orbito-frontal electrode montage (sessions separated by an average of ~5.5 days). Fifteen MEPs were obtained prior to, immediately following and in 5 min intervals for 30 min following tDCS. TMS was delivered at 130 % resting motor threshold using neuronavigation to ensure consistent coil localization. A number of non-experimental variables were collected during each session. At the individual level, considerable variability was seen among different testing sessions. No participant demonstrated an excitatory response ≥20 % to all three anodal sessions, and no participant demonstrated an inhibitory response ≥20 % to all three cathodal sessions. Intra-class correlation revealed poor anodal and cathodal test-retest reliability [anode: ICC(2,1) = 0.062; cathode: ICC(2,1) = 0.055] and moderate sham test-retest reliability [ICC(2,1) = 0.433]. Results also revealed no significant effect of tDCS at the group level. Using this common protocol, we found the effects of tDCS on MEP amplitudes to be highly variable at the individual level. In addition, no significant effects of tDCS on MEP amplitude were found at the group level. Future studies should consider utilizing a more strict experimental protocol to potentially account for intra-individual response variations. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 25% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 135 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Sweden | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 133 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 30 | 22% |
| Researcher | 19 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 18 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 16 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 4% |
| Other | 15 | 11% |
| Unknown | 31 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Neuroscience | 29 | 21% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 24 | 18% |
| Psychology | 23 | 17% |
| Sports and Recreations | 8 | 6% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 2% |
| Other | 10 | 7% |
| Unknown | 38 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 May 2017.
All research outputs
#2,655,472
of 23,298,349 outputs
Outputs from Experimental Brain Research
#187
of 3,262 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#43,427
of 300,008 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Experimental Brain Research
#3
of 47 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,298,349 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,262 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 300,008 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 47 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.