ArticleBrain stimulation
Methods to monitor accurate and consistent electrode placements in conventional transcranial electrical stimulation.
Article in Brain stimulation. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- A patient-specific, 3D printed neurostimulator enabling focal transcranial electrical stimulation and EEG at home.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2025Trial
- Accelerated transcranial magnetic stimulation for psychological distress in advanced cancer: A phase 2a feasibility and preliminary efficacy clinical trial.Palliative medicine · 2024Trial
- A novel technique for accurate electrode placement over cortical targets for transcranial electrical stimulation (tES) clinical trials.Journal of neural engineering · 2021Trial
- Machine learning and individual variability in electric field characteristics predict tDCS treatment response.Brain stimulationTrial
- Impact of electrode selection on modeling tDCS in the aging brain.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2023Article
- High-definition transcranial direct current stimulation enhances network segregation during spatial navigation in mild cognitive impairment.Cerebral cortex (New York, N.Y. : 1991) · 2022Article
- A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation to Remediate Age-Related Cognitive Decline in Healthy Older Adults.Neuropsychiatric disease and treatment · 2021Review
- Pain relief for osteoarthritis through combined treatment (PROACT): Protocol for a randomized controlled trial of mindfulness meditation combined with transcranial direct current stimulation in non-Hispanic black and white adults with knee osteoarthritis.Contemporary clinical trials · 2020Article
- Article
- The importance of accurately representing electrode position in transcranial direct current stimulation computational models.Brain stimulationArticle
- Individualized tDCS modeling predicts functional connectivity changes within the working memory network in older adults.Brain stimulationArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundInaccurate electrode placement and electrode drift during a transcranial electrical stimulation (tES) session have been shown to alter predicted field distributions in the brain and thus may contribute to a large variation in tES study outcomes. Currently, there is no objective and independent measure to quantify electrode placement accuracy/drift in tES clinical studies. OBJECTIVE/HYPOTHESIS: We proposed and tested novel methods to quantify accurate and consistent electrode placements in tES using models generated from a 3D scanner.
methodsAccurate electrode placements were quantified as Discrepancy in eight tES participants by comparing landmark distances of physical electrode locations F3/F4 to their model counterparts. Distances in models were computed using curve and linear based methods. Variability of landmark locations in a single subject was computed for multiple stimulation sessions to determine consistent electrode placements across four experimenters. MAIN
resultsWe obtained an average of 0.4 cm in Discrepancy, which was within the placement accuracy/drift threshold (1 cm) for conventional tES electrodes (∼35 cm
conclusionsThese methods provide objective feedback for experimenters on their performance in placing tES electrodes. Applications of these methods can be used to monitor electrode locations in tES studies of a larger cohort using F3/F4 montage and other conventional electrode arrangements. Future studies may include co-registering the landmark locations with imaging-derived head models to quantify the effects of electrode accuracy/drift on predicted field distributions in the brain.
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.