Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31780668›Full record

ArticleNature communications2019

Integrating electric field modeling and neuroimaging to explain inter-individual variability of tACS effects.

Florian H Kasten, Katharina Duecker, Marike C Maack, Arnd Meiser, Christoph S Herrmann

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Nature communications, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 107 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
107citing papers in PubMed, 4 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

107 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Cutaneous Alternating Current Stimulation Can Cause a Phasic Modulation of Speech Perception.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2026
    Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

47 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

5 authors.

Florian H KastenExperimental Psychology Lab, Department of Psychology, European Medical School, Cluster for Excellence "Hearing for All", Carl von Ossietzky University, Oldenburg, Germany.
Katharina DueckerExperimental Psychology Lab, Department of Psychology, European Medical School, Cluster for Excellence "Hearing for All", Carl von Ossietzky University, Oldenburg, Germany.
Marike C MaackExperimental Psychology Lab, Department of Psychology, European Medical School, Cluster for Excellence "Hearing for All", Carl von Ossietzky University, Oldenburg, Germany.
Arnd MeiserExperimental Psychology Lab, Department of Psychology, European Medical School, Cluster for Excellence "Hearing for All", Carl von Ossietzky University, Oldenburg, Germany.
Christoph S HerrmannExperimental Psychology Lab, Department of Psychology, European Medical School, Cluster for Excellence "Hearing for All", Carl von Ossietzky University, Oldenburg, Germany. christoph.herrmann@uni-oldenburg.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Transcranial electrical stimulation (tES) of the brain can have variable effects, plausibly driven by individual differences in neuroanatomy and resulting differences of the electric fields inside the brain. Here, we integrated individual simulations of electric fields during tES with source localization to predict variability of transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS) aftereffects on α-oscillations. In two experiments, participants received 20-min of either α-tACS (1 mA) or sham stimulation. Magnetoencephalogram (MEG) was recorded for 10-min before and after stimulation. tACS caused a larger power increase in the α-band compared to sham. The variability of this effect was significantly predicted by measures derived from individual electric field modeling. Our results directly link electric field variability to variability of tACS outcomes, underline the importance of individualizing stimulation protocols, and provide a novel approach to analyze tACS effects in terms of dose-response relationships.

Indexed as

AdultAlpha RhythmBiological Variation, PopulationBrainElectromagnetic FieldsFemaleHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMagnetoencephalographyMaleTranscranial Direct Current StimulationYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID31780668
PMCPMC6882891

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.