ArticleBrain stimulation
Cutaneous sensation of electrical stimulation waveforms.
Article in Brain stimulation. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- Robust enhancement of motor sequence learning with 4 mA transcranial electric stimulation.Brain stimulationTrial
- Optimizing Transcutaneous Electrical Stimulation Based on Frequency-Dependent Tissue Modeling and Signal Analysis.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Temporal interference stimulation for deep brain neuromodulation in humans.Nature biomedical engineering · 2026Review
- Non-vectorial integration of intersectional short-pulse stimulation enables enhanced deep brain modulation and effective seizure control.Communications medicine · 2026Article
- Evaluation of the Effectiveness of a Novel Wireless Energy-Transmitting Implantable Diaphragm Pacemaker in Anesthetized Pigs.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Review
- Harnessing theta waves: tACS as a breakthrough in alleviating post-stroke chronic pain.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2025Review
- Recommendations for the Safe Application of Temporal Interference Stimulation in the Human Brain Part II: Biophysics, Dosimetry, and Safety Recommendations.Bioelectromagnetics · 2025Article
- The safety and efficacy of applying a high-current temporal interference electrical stimulation in humans.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2024Article
- Evaluation of tolerability and safety of transcranial electrical stimulation with gel particle electrodes in healthy subjects.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2024Article
- Accelerated osteogenesis of bone graft by optimizing the bone microenvironment formed by electrical signals dependent on driving micro vibration stimulation.Materials today. Bio · 2023Article
- Noninvasive Brain Stimulation for Neurorehabilitation in Post-Stroke Patients.Brain sciences · 2023Review
- Microdermabrasion facilitates direct current stimulation by lowering skin resistance.Skin health and disease · 2022Article
- A method for precisely timed, on-demand intracranial stimulation using the RNS device.Brain stimulationArticle
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
Abstract
backgroundSkin sensation is the primary factor limiting the intensity of transcranial electrical stimulation (tES). It is well established that different waveforms generate different sensations, yet transcranial stimulation has been limited to a relatively small number of prototypical waveforms.
objectiveWe explore whether alternative stimulation waveforms could substantially reduce skin sensation and thus allow for stronger intensities in tES.
methodsWe systematically tested a range of waveforms in a series of 6 exploratory experiments stimulating human adults on the forearm and in one instance on the head. Subjects were asked to rate skin sensation level on a numerical scale from "none" to "extreme".
resultsHigh frequency (>1 kHz) monophasic square wave stimulation was found to decrease in sensation with increasing duty cycle, baseline, and frequency, but the sensation was never lower than for constant current stimulation. For the purpose of injecting a net direct current (DC), a constant current is optimal. For stimulation with alternating current (AC), sensation decreased with increasing frequency, consistent with previous reports. Amplitude modulation did not reduce sensation below stimulation with constant AC amplitude, and biphasic square waveforms produced higher sensation levels than biphasic sinusoidal waveforms. Furthermore, for DC stimulation, sensation levels on the arm were similar to those reported on the head.
conclusionOur comparisons of various waveforms for monophasic and biphasic stimulation indicate that conventional DC and AC waveforms may provide the lowest skin sensations levels for transcutaneous electrical stimulation. These results are likely generalizable to tES applications.
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.