ArticleExperimental brain research2019
Influence of neurovascular mechanisms on response to tDCS: an exploratory study.
Article in Experimental brain research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation to Provide Neuroprotection and Enhance Cerebral Blood Flow in Stroke: A Comprehensive Review.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2024Review
- Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation for Chronic Stroke: Is Neuroimaging the Answer to the Next Leap Forward?Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- Neural correlates of visual aesthetic appreciation: insights from non-invasive brain stimulation.Experimental brain research · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The beneficial effects of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) for stroke rehabilitation are limited by the variability in changes in corticomotor excitability (CME) after tDCS. Neuronal activity is closely related to cerebral blood flow; however, the cerebral hemodynamics of neuromodulation in relation to neural effects have been less explored. In this study, we examined the effects of tDCS on cerebral blood velocity (CBv) in chronic stroke survivors using transcranial Doppler (TCD) ultrasound in relation to changes in CME and described the neurovascular characteristics of tDCS responders. Middle cerebral artery (MCA) CBv, cerebrovascular resistance (CVRi) and other cerebral hemodynamics-related variables were continuously measured before and after 15 min of 1 mA anodal tDCS to the lesioned lower limb M1. tDCS did not modulate CBv in the whole group and upon TMS-based stratification of responders and non-responders. However, at baseline, responders demonstrated lower CME levels, lower CBv and higher CVRi as compared to non-responders. These results indicate a possible difference in baseline CME and CBv in tDCS responders that may influence their response to neuromodulation. Future trials with a large sample size and repeated baseline measurements may help validate these findings and establish a relationship between neuromodulation and neurovascular mechanisms in stroke.
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.