Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26148882›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of applied physiology2015

The effect of transcranial direct current stimulation of the motor cortex on exercise-induced pain.

Luca Angius, James G Hopker, Samuele M Marcora, Alexis R Mauger

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of applied physiology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

40 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Luca AngiusEndurance Research Group, School of Sport and Exercise Sciences, Faculty of Science, University of Kent, Chatham Maritime, Kent, ME4 4AG, UK.
James G HopkerEndurance Research Group, School of Sport and Exercise Sciences, Faculty of Science, University of Kent, Chatham Maritime, Kent, ME4 4AG, UK.
Samuele M MarcoraEndurance Research Group, School of Sport and Exercise Sciences, Faculty of Science, University of Kent, Chatham Maritime, Kent, ME4 4AG, UK.
Alexis R MaugerEndurance Research Group, School of Sport and Exercise Sciences, Faculty of Science, University of Kent, Chatham Maritime, Kent, ME4 4AG, UK. lex.mauger@gmail.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTranscranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) provides a new exciting means to investigate the role of the brain during exercise. However, this technique is not widely used in exercise science, with little known regarding effective electrode montages. This study investigated whether tDCS of the motor cortex (M1) would elicit an analgesic response to exercise-induced pain (EIP).

methodsNine participants completed a VO2max test and three time to exhaustion (TTE) tasks on separate days following either 10 min 2 mA tDCS of the M1, a sham or a control. Additionally, seven participants completed 3 cold pressor tests (CPT) following the same experimental conditions (tDCS, SHAM, CON). Using a well-established tDCS protocol, tDCS was delivered by placing the anodal electrode above the left M1 with the cathodal electrode above dorsolateral right prefrontal cortex. Gas exchange, blood lactate, EIP and ratings of perceived exertion (RPE) were monitored during the TTE test. Perceived pain was recorded during the CPT.

resultsDuring the TTE, no significant differences in time to exhaustion, RPE or EIP were found between conditions. However, during the CPT, perceived pain was significantly (P < 0.05) reduced in the tDCS condition (7.4 ± 1.2) compared with both the CON (8.6 ± 1.0) and SHAM (8.4 ± 1.3) conditions.

conclusionThese findings demonstrate that stimulation of the M1 using tDCS does not induce analgesia during exercise, suggesting that the processing of pain produced via classic measures of experimental pain (i.e., a CPT) is different to that of EIP. These results provide important methodological advancement in developing the use of tDCS in exercise.

Indexed as

Pain ManagementAdultExerciseHumansMaleMotor CortexPainPain ThresholdTranscranial Direct Current StimulationYoung AdultExerciseFatiguePain perceptionPerformancetDCS

Identifiers

PMID26148882

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.