↓ Skip to main content

Single-Session Anodal tDCS with Small-Size Stimulating Electrodes Over Frontoparietal Superficial Sites Does Not Affect Motor Sequence Learning

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (62nd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users

Readers on

mendeley
66 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Single-Session Anodal tDCS with Small-Size Stimulating Electrodes Over Frontoparietal Superficial Sites Does Not Affect Motor Sequence Learning
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, April 2017
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2017.00153
Pubmed ID
Authors

Fahimeh Hashemirad, Paul B. Fitzgerald, Maryam Zoghi, Shapour Jaberzadeh

Abstract

Due to the potential of anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (a-tDCS) for enhancement of fine sequenced movements and increasing interest in achieving high level of fine movements in the trained and untrained hands especially at initial stage of learning, we designed this study to investigate whether the application of single-session a-tDCS with small-size stimulating electrodes over FPN sites, such as dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC), primary motor cortex (M1) or posterior parietal cortex (PPC) could enhance sequence learning with the trained hand and these effects are transferred into the untrained hand or not. A total of 51 right-handed healthy participants were randomly assigned to one of the four stimulation groups: a-tDCS of left M1, DLPFC, PPC, or sham. Stimulation was applied for 20 min during a sequential visual isometric pinch task (SVIPT). Eight blocks of training using SVIPT were completed with the right hand during stimulation. Two blocks of sequence training with each hand were performed by participants as assessment blocks at three time points: baseline, 15 min and one day following the intervention. Behavioral outcomes including movement time, error rate and skill were assessed in all assessment blocks across three time points. We also measured corticospinal excitability, short-interval intracortical inhibition, and intracortical facilitation using single- and paired-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation. The results indicated that the behavioral outcomes were significantly improved with the right trained hand, but this learning effect was not modulated by a-tDCS with small-size stimulating electrodes over the FPN. Transfer of learning into the untrained hand was observed in all four groups for movement time but not for the error rate or skill. Our results suggest that sequential learning in SVIPT and its transfer into the untrained hand were not sensitive to a single-session a-tDCS with small-size stimulating electrodes over left M1, DLPFC or PPC in young healthy participants.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 66 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 66 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 15%
Student > Bachelor 9 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 14%
Researcher 8 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 5%
Other 7 11%
Unknown 20 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 13 20%
Psychology 13 20%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 6%
Computer Science 1 2%
Other 5 8%
Unknown 25 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 22 April 2017.
All research outputs
#7,334,483
of 23,301,510 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#3,088
of 7,261 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#115,782
of 309,682 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#98
of 192 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,301,510 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,261 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% 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 309,682 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 192 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.