ArticlePloS one2014
Computational study on subdural cortical stimulation - the influence of the head geometry, anisotropic conductivity, and electrode configuration.
Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Electric field simulation and appropriate electrode positioning for optimized transcranial direct current stimulation of stroke patients: an in Silico model.Scientific reports · 2024Trial
- Identifying and Engaging Neuronal Oscillations by Transcranial Alternating Current Stimulation in Patients With Chronic Low Back Pain: A Randomized, Crossover, Double-Blind, Sham-Controlled Pilot Study.The journal of pain · 2019Trial
- Towards Precise Synthetic Neural Codes: High-dimensional Stimulation with Flexible Electrodes.Npj flexible electronics · 2025Article
- Validating Patient-Specific Finite Element Models of Direct Electrocortical Stimulation.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2021Article
- Article
- Modelling of the Current Density Distributions during Cortical Electric Stimulation for Neuropathic Pain Treatment.Computational and mathematical methods in medicine · 2018Article
- The Effect of a Transcranial Channel as a Skull/Brain Interface in High-Definition Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation-A Computational Study.Scientific reports · 2017Article
- Multi-Scale Computational Models for Electrical Brain Stimulation.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2017Review
- Sensory-parietal cortical stimulation improves motor recovery in severe capsular infarct.Journal of cerebral blood flow and metabolism : official journal of the International Society of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism · 2016Article
- Effect of Anatomically Realistic Full-Head Model on Activation of Cortical Neurons in Subdural Cortical Stimulation-A Computational Study.Scientific reports · 2016Article
- A multi-scale computational model of the effects of TMS on motor cortex.F1000Research · 2016Article
- Computational Study of Subdural Cortical Stimulation: Effects of Simulating Anisotropic Conductivity on Activation of Cortical Neurons.PloS one · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Subdural cortical stimulation (SuCS) is a method used to inject electrical current through electrodes beneath the dura mater, and is known to be useful in treating brain disorders. However, precisely how SuCS must be applied to yield the most effective results has rarely been investigated. For this purpose, we developed a three-dimensional computational model that represents an anatomically realistic brain model including an upper chest. With this computational model, we investigated the influence of stimulation amplitudes, electrode configurations (single or paddle-array), and white matter conductivities (isotropy or anisotropy). Further, the effects of stimulation were compared with two other computational models, including an anatomically realistic brain-only model and the simplified extruded slab model representing the precentral gyrus area. The results of voltage stimulation suggested that there was a synergistic effect with the paddle-array due to the use of multiple electrodes; however, a single electrode was more efficient with current stimulation. The conventional model (simplified extruded slab) far overestimated the effects of stimulation with both voltage and current by comparison to our proposed realistic upper body model. However, the realistic upper body and full brain-only models demonstrated similar stimulation effects. In our investigation of the influence of anisotropic conductivity, model with a fixed ratio (1∶10) anisotropic conductivity yielded deeper penetration depths and larger extents of stimulation than others. However, isotropic and anisotropic models with fixed ratios (1∶2, 1∶5) yielded similar stimulation effects. Lastly, whether the reference electrode was located on the right or left chest had no substantial effects on stimulation.
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.