ArticlePhysiological reports2020
Comparative study of motor cortical excitability changes following anodal tDCS or high-frequency tRNS in relation to stimulation duration.
Article in Physiological reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Reducing attention bias toward negative emotional stimuli with transcranial random noise stimulation: a randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled, crossover study.Scientific reports · 2025Trial
- Online HD-tRNS Over the Right Temporoparietal Junction Modulates Social Inference But Not Motor Coordination.eNeuro · 2025Trial
- Differing effectiveness of transcranial random noise stimulation and transcranial direct current stimulation for enhancing working memory in healthy individuals: a randomized controlled trial.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2024Trial
- What are the optimal transcranial direct current stimulation parameters and design elements to modulate corticospinal excitability? A systematic review and longitudinal meta-analysis.Neurological research and practice · 2025Review
- Effect of high-frequency rTMS on cognitive deficits in schizophrenia: A randomized, double blind, sham-controlled trial.Indian journal of psychiatry · 2025Article
- High-definition transcranial direct-current stimulation of left primary motor cortices modulates beta and gamma oscillations serving motor control.The Journal of physiology · 2025Article
- Comparing the effect of transcranial random noise stimulation and transcranial direct current stimulation over the motor cortex on motor performance in men vs. women: a randomized controlled crossover study.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2025Article
- Article
- Comparative study of motor cortical excitability changes following anodal tDCS or high-frequency tRNS in relation to stimulation duration.Physiological reports · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn this study, we investigate the capacity of two different non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) techniques (anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (anodal tDCS) and high-frequency transcranial random noise stimulation (hf-tRNS)) regarding the relationship between stimulation duration and their efficacy in inducing long-lasting changes in motor cortical excitability.
methodsFifteen healthy subjects attended six experimental sessions (90 experiments in total) and underwent both anodal tDCS of 7, 13, and 20 min duration, as well as high-frequency 1mA-tRNS of 7, 13, and 20 min stimulation duration. Sessions were performed in a randomized order and subjects were blinded to the applied methods.
resultsFor anodal tDCS, no significant stable increases of motor cortical excitability were observed for either stimulation duration. In contrast, for hf -tRNS a stimulation duration of 7 min resulted in a significant increase of motor cortical excitability lasting from 20 to 60 min poststimulation. While an intermediate duration of 13 min hf-tRNS failed to induce lasting changes in motor cortical excitability, a longer stimulation duration of 20 min hf-tRNS led only to significant increases at 50 min poststimulation which did not outlast until 60 min poststimulation.
conclusionHf-tRNS for a duration of 7 min induced robust increases of motor cortical excitability, suggesting an indirect proportional relationship between stimulation duration and efficacy. While hf-tRNS appeared superior to anodal tDCS in this study, further systematic and randomized experiments are necessary to evaluate the generalizability of our observations and to address current intensity as a further modifiable contributor to the variability of transcranial brain stimulation.
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.