Trial reportScientific reports2019
Direct stimulation of somatosensory cortex results in slower reaction times compared to peripheral touch in humans.
Trial report in Scientific reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 40 citations in OpenAlex.
- Semantic-Physical Sensor Fusion for Safe Physical Human-Robot Interaction in Dual-Arm Rehabilitation.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Visual context affects the perceived timing of tactile sensations elicited through intracortical microstimulation: a case study of two participants.Journal of neurophysiology · 2025Article
- Training-Free Regulation of Grasping by Intracortical Tactile Feedback Designed via S1-M1 Communication.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2025Article
- Direct Prosthesis Force Control with Tactile Feedback May Connect with the Internal Model.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2024Article
- Visual context affects the perceived timing of tactile sensations elicited through intra-cortical microstimulation.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024Article
- Utilization of peripheral nerve feedback at a preconscious level.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2024Article
- The Effect of Tactile Imagery Training on Reaction Time in Healthy Participants.Brain sciences · 2023Article
- Benchtop and bedside validation of a low-cost programmable cortical stimulator in a testbed for bi-directional brain-computer-interface research.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2022Article
- Neurosensory development of the four brainstem-projecting sensory systems and their integration in the telencephalon.Frontiers in neural circuits · 2022Article
- Cortical Stimulation Paired With Volitional Unimanual Movement Affects Interhemispheric Communication.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2021Article
- Signal recovery from stimulation artifacts in intracranial recordings with dictionary learning.Journal of neural engineering · 2020Article
- Short reaction times in response to multi-electrode intracortical microstimulation may provide a basis for rapid movement-related feedback.Journal of neural engineering · 2019Article
- Direct Electrical Stimulation in Electrocorticographic Brain-Computer Interfaces: Enabling Technologies for Input to Cortex.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2019Review
- Somatosensation Evoked by Cortical Surface Stimulation of the Human Primary Somatosensory Cortex.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Direct cortical stimulation (DCS) of primary somatosensory cortex (S1) could help restore sensation and provide task-relevant feedback in a neuroprosthesis. However, the psychophysics of S1 DCS is poorly studied, including any comparison to cutaneous haptic stimulation. We compare the response times to DCS of human hand somatosensory cortex through electrocorticographic grids with response times to haptic stimuli delivered to the hand in four subjects. We found that subjects respond significantly slower to S1 DCS than to natural, haptic stimuli for a range of DCS train durations. Median response times for haptic stimulation varied from 198 ms to 313 ms, while median responses to reliably perceived DCS ranged from 254 ms for one subject, all the way to 528 ms for another. We discern no significant impact of learning or habituation through the analysis of blocked trials, and find no significant impact of cortical stimulation train duration on response times. Our results provide a realistic set of expectations for latencies with somatosensory DCS feedback for future neuroprosthetic applications and motivate the study of neural mechanisms underlying human perception of somatosensation via DCS.
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.