Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27717601›Full record

ArticleBrain stimulation

Direct Current Stimulation Alters Neuronal Input/Output Function.

Belen Lafon, Asif Rahman, Marom Bikson, Lucas C Parra

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Brain stimulation. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 81 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
81citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

81 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Does non-invasive brain stimulation modulate emotional stress reactivity?Social cognitive and affective neuroscience · 2020
    Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Computational Optimization of Spinal Cord Stimulation for Dorsal Horn Interneuron Polarization.Neuromodulation : journal of the International Neuromodulation Society · 2025
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Effects of dendritic CaJournal of computational neuroscience · 2025
    Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

21 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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.

Belen LafonDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, The City College of the City University of New York, New York, NY, USA. Electronic address: belulafon@gmail.com.
Asif RahmanDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, The City College of the City University of New York, New York, NY, USA.
Marom BiksonDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, The City College of the City University of New York, New York, NY, USA.
Lucas C ParraDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, The City College of the City University of New York, New York, NY, USA.

Funding

Training and Career Development CoreU54CA132378 · NCI · CITY COLLEGE OF NEW YORK · PI Tim Alan Ahles, ADRIANA ESPINOSA · 2008 to 2026
$28.9M
Training and Career Development and Education CoreU54CA137788 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INST CAN RESEARCH · PI Daniel Alan Heller · 2008 to 2026
$28.1M
Effects of direct-current stimulation on synaptic plasticityR01NS095123 · NINDS · CITY COLLEGE OF NEW YORK · PI PARRA, LUCAS C · 2016 to 2020
$1.7M
CRCNS: Effects of Weak Applied Currents on Memory Consolidation During SleepR01MH092926 · NIMH · CITY COLLEGE OF NEW YORK · PI PARRA, LUCAS C · 2010 to 2014
$618k
NCI NIH HHS U54 CA132378NCI NIH HHS U54 CA137788NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH092926NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS095123
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDirect current stimulation (DCS) affects both neuronal firing rate and synaptic efficacy. The neuronal input/output (I/O) function determines the likelihood that a neuron elicits an action potential in response to synaptic input of a given strength. Changes of the neuronal I/O function by DCS may underlie previous observations in animal models and human testing, yet have not been directly assessed.

objectiveTest if the neuronal input/output function is affected by DCS

methodsUsing rat hippocampal brain slices and computational modeling, we provide evidence for how DCS modulates the neuronal I/O function.

resultsWe show for the first time that DCS modulates the likelihood of neuronal firing for a given and fixed synaptic input. Opposing polarization of soma and dendrite may have a synergistic effect for anodal stimulation, increasing the driving force of synaptic activity while simultaneously increasing spiking probability at the soma. For cathodal stimulation, however, the opposing effects tend to cancel. This results in an asymmetry in the strength of the effects of stimulation for opposite polarities.

conclusionsOur results may explain the asymmetries observed in acute and long term effects of transcranial direct current stimulation.

Indexed as

AnimalsElectric StimulationElectrodesExcitatory Postsynaptic PotentialsHippocampusHumansMaleMotor CortexNeuronsOrgan Culture TechniquesRatsRats, WistarTranscranial Direct Current StimulationDCSElectrical stimulationExcitabilityInput-outputtDCSTwo-compartment model

Identifiers

PMID27717601
PMCPMC5774009

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.