ArticleCognitive processing2020
Task load modulates tDCS effects on brain network for phonological processing.
Article in Cognitive processing, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Motor participation in phonological processing can be modulated by task nature across the speech perception to speech production range. The pars opercularis of the left inferior frontal gyrus (LIFG) would be increasingly active across this range, because of changing motor demands. Here, we investigated with simultaneous tDCS and fMRI whether the task load modulation of tDCS effects translates into predictable patterns of functional connectivity. Findings were analysed under the "multi-node framework", according to which task load and the network structure underlying cognitive functions are modulators of tDCS effects. In a within-subject study, participants (N = 20) performed categorical perception, lexical decision and word naming tasks [which differentially recruit the target of stimulation (LIFG)], which were repeatedly administered in three tDCS sessions (anodal, cathodal and sham). The LIFG, left superior temporal gyrus and their right homologues formed the target network subserving phonological processing. C-tDCS inhibition and A-tDCS excitation should increase with task load. Correspondingly, the larger the task load, the larger the relevance of the target for the task and smaller the room for compensation of C-tDCS inhibition by less relevant nodes. Functional connectivity analyses were performed with partial correlations, and network compensation globally inferred by comparing the relative number of significant connections each condition induced relative to sham. Overall, simultaneous tDCS and fMRI was adequate to show that motor participation in phonological processing is modulated by task nature. Network responses induced by C-tDCS across phonological processing tasks matched predictions. A-tDCS effects were attributed to optimisation of network efficiency.
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.