Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34404467›Full record

ArticleBiology of sex differences2021

Investigating the sex-dependent effects of prefrontal cortex stimulation on response execution and inhibition.

Daniel J Fehring, Ranshikha Samandra, Zakia Z Haque, Shapour Jaberzadeh, Marcello Rosa, Farshad A Mansouri

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Biology of sex differences, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Sex dependency of subconscious visual perception.Biology of sex differences · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Daniel J Fehring *Cognitive Neuroscience Laboratory, Monash Biomedicine Discovery Institute, Department of Physiology, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, 3800, Australia.
Ranshikha Samandra *Cognitive Neuroscience Laboratory, Monash Biomedicine Discovery Institute, Department of Physiology, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, 3800, Australia.
Zakia Z Haque *Cognitive Neuroscience Laboratory, Monash Biomedicine Discovery Institute, Department of Physiology, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, 3800, Australia.
Shapour JaberzadehDepartment of Physiotherapy, Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation & Neuroplasticity Laboratory, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, 3199, Australia.
Marcello RosaARC Centre of Excellence in Integrative Brain Function, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, 3800, Australia.
Farshad A MansouriCognitive Neuroscience Laboratory, Monash Biomedicine Discovery Institute, Department of Physiology, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, 3800, Australia. farshad.mansouri@monash.edu.ORCID 0000-0001-9130-1789
Monash University · AUDiscovery Institute · USARC Centre of Excellence for Integrative Brain Function · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Context-dependent execution or inhibition of a response is an important aspect of executive control, which is impaired in neuropsychological and addiction disorders. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) of the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) has been considered a remedial approach to address deficits in response control; however, considerable variability has been observed in tDCS effects. These variabilities might be related to contextual differences such as background visual-auditory stimuli or subjects' sex. In this study, we examined the interaction of two contextual factors, participants' sex and background acoustic stimuli, in modulating the effects of tDCS on response inhibition and execution. In a sham-controlled and cross-over (repeated-measure) design, 73 participants (37 females) performed a Stop-Signal Task in different background acoustic conditions before and after tDCS (anodal or sham) was applied over the DLPFC. Participants had to execute a speeded response in Go trials but inhibit their response in Stop trials. Participants' sex was fully counterbalanced across all experimental conditions (acoustic and tDCS). We found significant practice-related learning that appeared as changes in indices of response inhibition (stop-signal reaction time and percentage of successful inhibition) and action execution (response time and percentage correct). The tDCS and acoustic stimuli interactively influenced practice-related changes in response inhibition and these effects were uniformly seen in both males and females. However, the effects of tDCS on response execution (percentage of correct responses) were sex-dependent in that practice-related changes diminished in females but heightened in males. Our findings indicate that participants' sex influenced the effects of tDCS on the execution, but not inhibition, of responses.

Indexed as

Transcranial Direct Current StimulationDorsolateral Prefrontal CortexFemaleHumansLearningMalePrefrontal CortexReaction TimeBrain stimulationLearningSex dependency of cognitive functionsStop-Signal Task

Identifiers

PMID34404467
PMCPMC8369781
OpenAlexW3195404378

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.