Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26170066›Full record

ArticleJournal of neural engineering2015

Impact of uncertain head tissue conductivity in the optimization of transcranial direct current stimulation for an auditory target.

Christian Schmidt, Sven Wagner, Martin Burger, Ursula van Rienen, Carsten H Wolters

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of neural engineering, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Quasistatic approximation in neuromodulation.Journal of neural engineering · 2024
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Bioelectromagnetism in Human Brain Research: New Applications, New Questions.The Neuroscientist : a review journal bringing neurobiology, neurology and psychiatry · 2023
    Review
  8. Comparison of EEG Source Localization Using Simplified and Anatomically Accurate Head Models in Younger and Older Adults.IEEE transactions on neural systems and rehabilitation engineering : a publication of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society · 2023
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. 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

5 authors.

Christian SchmidtInstitute of General Electrical Engineering, University of Rostock, D-18059 Rostock, Germany.
Sven Wagner
Martin Burger
Ursula van Rienen
Carsten H Wolters

Funding

TRD - VisualizationP41GM103545 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF UTAH · PI JOHNSON, CHRISTOPHER R., MACLEOD, ROB S. · 2012 to 2019
$9.7M
NIGMS NIH HHS P41 GM103545NIGMS NIH HHS P41GM103545
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTranscranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a non-invasive brain stimulation technique to modify neural excitability. Using multi-array tDCS, we investigate the influence of inter-individually varying head tissue conductivity profiles on optimal electrode configurations for an auditory cortex stimulation. APPROACH: In order to quantify the uncertainty of the optimal electrode configurations, multi-variate generalized polynomial chaos expansions of the model solutions are used based on uncertain conductivity profiles of the compartments skin, skull, gray matter, and white matter. Stochastic measures, probability density functions, and sensitivity of the quantities of interest are investigated for each electrode and the current density at the target with the resulting stimulation protocols visualized on the head surface. MAIN

resultsWe demonstrate that the optimized stimulation protocols are only comprised of a few active electrodes, with tolerable deviations in the stimulation amplitude of the anode. However, large deviations in the order of the uncertainty in the conductivity profiles could be noted in the stimulation protocol of the compensating cathodes. Regarding these main stimulation electrodes, the stimulation protocol was most sensitive to uncertainty in skull conductivity. Finally, the probability that the current density amplitude in the auditory cortex target region is supra-threshold was below 50%. SIGNIFICANCE: The results suggest that an uncertain conductivity profile in computational models of tDCS can have a substantial influence on the prediction of optimal stimulation protocols for stimulation of the auditory cortex. The investigations carried out in this study present a possibility to predict the probability of providing a therapeutic effect with an optimized electrode system for future auditory clinical and experimental procedures of tDCS applications.

Indexed as

Models, AnatomicAdultAuditory CortexComputer SimulationElectric ConductivityEvoked Potentials, AuditoryHeadHumansMaleModels, StatisticalNerve NetReproducibility of ResultsSensitivity and SpecificityTranscranial Direct Current Stimulation

Identifiers

PMID26170066
PMCPMC4539365

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.