ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2014
Gender Differences in Current Received during Transcranial Electrical Stimulation.
Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
41 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 74 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effects of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on Upper Limb Muscle Strength and Endurance in Healthy Individuals: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Frontiers in physiology · 2022Pooled it
- Cerebellar Asymmetry of Motivational Direction: Anger-Dependent Effects of Cerebellar Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on Aggression in Healthy Volunteers.Cerebellum (London, England) · 2024Trial
- Sex matters for the enhancement of cognitive training with transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS).Biology of sex differences · 2023Trial
- Individual Differences in Response to Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation With Language Therapy in Subacute Stroke.Neurorehabilitation and neural repair · 2023Trial
- Reading proficiency influences the effects of transcranial direct current stimulation: Evidence from selective modulation of dorsal and ventral pathways of reading in bilinguals.Brain and language · 2020Trial
- Impact of 3-Day Combined Anodal Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation-Visuospatial Training on Object-Location Memory in Healthy Older Adults and Patients with Mild Cognitive Impairment.Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD · 2020Trial
- Trial
- Individual differences in neuroanatomy and neurophysiology predict effects of transcranial alternating current stimulation.Brain stimulationTrial
- Sex Does Matter! The Influence of Sex on Outcomes of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS).Cells · 2026Review
- Reliability of electric field simulations in different age groups: impact of data quality metrics.Brain informatics · 2026Article
- Approach Motivation and Reward Sensitivity: Effects of High-Definition Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (HD-tDCS) to Brain Hemispheres on Effort-Related Cardiovascular Response.The European journal of neuroscience · 2026Article
- Methods of Computational Modelling in Studies of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) in Adults to Inform Protocols for Tinnitus Treatment: A Scoping Review.Brain sciences · 2025Review
- Dose standardization for transcranial electrical stimulation: an accessible approach.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Comparing the effect of transcranial random noise stimulation and transcranial direct current stimulation over the motor cortex on motor performance in men vs. women: a randomized controlled crossover study.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2025Article
- Direct Current Stimulation Modulates Synaptic Facilitation via Distinct Presynaptic Calcium Channels.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Article
- Understanding the effects of cortical gyrification in tACS: insights from experiments and computational models.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2023Article
- Transcranial direct current stimulation combined with amantadine in repetitive mild traumatic brain injury in rats.BMC neuroscience · 2022Article
- Sensorimotor performance after high-definition transcranial direct current stimulation over the primary somatosensory or motor cortices in men versus women.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Inter-Individual Variability in tDCS Effects: A Narrative Review on the Contribution of Stable, Variable, and Contextual Factors.Brain sciences · 2022Review
- High Estrogen Levels Cause Greater Leg Muscle Fatigability in Eumenorrheic Young Women after 4 mA Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation.Brain sciences · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Low current transcranial electrical stimulation (tCS) is an effective but somewhat inconsistent tool for augmenting neuromodulation. In this study, we used 3D MRI guided electrical transcranial stimulation modeling to estimate the range of current intensities received at cortical brain tissues. Combined T1, T2, and proton density MRIs from 24 adult subjects (12 male and 12 female) were modeled with virtual electrodes placed at F3, F4, C3, and C4. Two sizes of electrodes 20 mm round and 50 mm × 45 mm were examined at 0.5, 1, and 2 mA input currents. The intensity of current received was sampled in a 1-cm sphere placed at the cortex directly under each scalp electrode. There was a 10-fold difference in the amount of current received by individuals. A large gender difference was observed with female subjects receiving significantly less current at targeted parietal cortex than male subjects when stimulated at identical current levels (P < 0.05). Larger electrodes delivered somewhat larger amounts of current than the smaller ones (P < 0.01). Electrodes in the frontal regions delivered less current than those in the parietal region (P < 0.05). There were large individual differences in current levels that the subjects received. Analysis of the cranial bone showed that the gender difference and the frontal parietal differences are due to differences in cranial bone. Males have more cancelous parietal bone and females more dense parietal bone (P < 0.01). These differences should be considered when planning tCS studies and call into question earlier reports of gender differences due to hormonal influences.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.