Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30708350›Full record

Trial reportNeuroImage. Clinical2019

Anodal tDCS modulates cortical activity and synchronization in Parkinson's disease depending on motor processing.

Anna Schoellmann, Marlieke Scholten, Barbara Wasserka, Rathinaswamy B Govindan, Rejko Krüger, Alireza Gharabaghi, Christian Plewnia, Daniel Weiss

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in NeuroImage. Clinical, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Clinical neurophysiology in the treatment of movement disorders: IFCN handbook chapter.Clinical neurophysiology : official journal of the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2024
    Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
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

8 authors.

Anna SchoellmannCenter for Neurology, Department for Neurodegenerative Diseases, Hertie Institute for Clinical Brain Research, University of Tübingen, Hoppe-Seyler-Str. 3, 72076 Tübingen, Germany; German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE), Otfried-Müller-Straße 23, 72076 Tübingen, Germany. Electronic address: anna.schoellmann@med.uni-tuebingen.de.
Marlieke ScholtenCenter for Neurology, Department for Neurodegenerative Diseases, Hertie Institute for Clinical Brain Research, University of Tübingen, Hoppe-Seyler-Str. 3, 72076 Tübingen, Germany; German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE), Otfried-Müller-Straße 23, 72076 Tübingen, Germany.
Barbara WasserkaNeurophysiology & Interventional Neuropsychiatry, Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University of Tübingen, Calwerstr. 14, 72076 Tübingen, Germany.
Rathinaswamy B GovindanFoetal Medicine Institute, Division of Foetal and Transitional Medicine, Children's National Health System, M3118C Washington, DC, USA.
Rejko KrügerCenter for Neurology, Department for Neurodegenerative Diseases, Hertie Institute for Clinical Brain Research, University of Tübingen, Hoppe-Seyler-Str. 3, 72076 Tübingen, Germany; German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE), Otfried-Müller-Straße 23, 72076 Tübingen, Germany; Werner-Reichardt Centre for Integrative Neuroscience, 72076 Tübingen, Germany; Clinical and Experimental Neuroscience, Luxembourg Center for Systems Biomedicine (LCSB), University of Luxembourg and Centre Hospitalier de Luxembourg (CHL), 1210 Luxembourg, Luxembourg.
Alireza GharabaghiWerner-Reichardt Centre for Integrative Neuroscience, 72076 Tübingen, Germany; Division of Functional and Restorative Neurosurgery, Department of Neurosurgery, University of Tübingen, Hoppe-Seyler-Str. 3, 72076 Tübingen, Germany.
Christian PlewniaNeurophysiology & Interventional Neuropsychiatry, Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University of Tübingen, Calwerstr. 14, 72076 Tübingen, Germany; Werner-Reichardt Centre for Integrative Neuroscience, 72076 Tübingen, Germany.
Daniel WeissCenter for Neurology, Department for Neurodegenerative Diseases, Hertie Institute for Clinical Brain Research, University of Tübingen, Hoppe-Seyler-Str. 3, 72076 Tübingen, Germany; German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE), Otfried-Müller-Straße 23, 72076 Tübingen, Germany. Electronic address: daniel.weiss@uni-tuebingen.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTranscranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) may alleviate motor symptoms in Parkinson's disease (PD). However, the neurophysiological effects of tDCS on cortical activation, synchronization, and the relation to clinical motor symptoms and motor integration need characterization.

objectiveWe aimed to explore the effect of tDCS over the left sensorimotor area on clinical motor outcome, right hand fine motor performance as well as cortical activity and synchronization in the high beta range.

methodsIn this double-blind randomized sham-controlled clinico-neurophysiological study we investigated ten idiopathic PD patients and eleven matched healthy controls (HC) on two days during an isometric precision grip task and at rest before and after 'verum' and 'sham' anodal tDCS (20 min; 1 mA; anode [C3], cathode [Fp2]). We measured clinical outcome, fine motor performance, and analysed both cortical frequency domain activity and corticocortical imaginary coherence.

resultstDCS improved PD motor symptoms. Neurophysiological features indicated a motor-task-specific modulation of activity and coherence from 22 to 27 Hz after 'verum' stimulation in PD. Activity was significantly reduced over the left sensorimotor and right frontotemporal area. Before stimulation, PD patients showed reduced coherence over the left sensorimotor area during motor task compared to HC, and this increased after 'verum' stimulation in the motor task. The activity and synchronization modulation were neither observed at rest, after sham stimulation nor in healthy controls.

conclusionVerum tDCS modulated the PD cortical network specifically during fine motor integration. Cortical oscillatory features were not in general deregulated in PD, but depended on motor processing.

Indexed as

Transcranial Direct Current StimulationAdultAgedCerebral CortexDouble-Blind MethodElectroencephalography Phase SynchronizationFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedMotor SkillsParkinson DiseasePlacebosSignal Processing, Computer-AssistedTreatment OutcomePlacebosbrain stimulationcoherencecorticalParkinson's diseasetranscranial direct current stimulation

Identifiers

PMID30708350
PMCPMC6354441

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.