Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34648453›Full record

ArticleIEEE transactions on neural systems and rehabilitation engineering : a publication of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society2021

Evaluating Current Density Modeling of Non-Invasive Eye and Brain Electrical Stimulation Using Phosphene Thresholds.

B A Sabel, A Kresinsky, L Cardenas-Morales, J Haueisen, A Hunold, M Dannhauer, A Antal

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in IEEE transactions on neural systems and rehabilitation engineering : a publication of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 33% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. [A research on epilepsy source localization from scalp electroencephalograph based on patient-specific head model and multi-dipole model].Sheng wu yi xue gong cheng xue za zhi = Journal of biomedical engineering = Shengwu yixue gongchengxue zazhi · 2023
    Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

B A Sabel
A Kresinsky
L Cardenas-Morales
J Haueisen
A Hunold
M Dannhauer
A Antal
Otto-von-Guericke-Universität Magdeburg · DETechnische Universität Ilmenau · DEUniversitätsmedizin Göttingen · DEUniversity of Utah · US

Funding

TRD - VisualizationP41GM103545 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF UTAH · PI JOHNSON, CHRISTOPHER R., MACLEOD, ROB S. · 2012 to 2019
$9.7M
NIGMS NIH HHS P41 GM103545
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Because current flow cannot be measured directly in the intact retina or brain, current density distribution models were developed to estimate it during magnetic or electrical stimulation. A paradigm is now needed to evaluate if current flow modeling can be related to physiologically meaningful signs of true current distribution in the human brain. We used phosphene threshold measurements (PTs) as surrogate markers of current-flow to determine if PTs, evoked by transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS), can be matched with current density estimates generated by head model-based computer simulations. Healthy, male subjects (n=15) were subjected to three-staged PT measurements comparing six unilateral and one bilateral stimulation electrode montages according to the 10/20 system: Fp2-Suborbital right (So), Fp2-right shoulder (rS), Fp2-Cz, Fp2- O2, So-rS, Cz-F8 and F7-F8. The stimulation frequency was set at 16 Hz. Subjects were asked to report the appearance and localization of phosphenes in their visual field for every montage. Current density models were built using multi-modal imaging data of a standard brain, meshed with isotropic conductivities of different tissues of the head using the SimBio and SCIRun software packages. We observed that lower PTs were associated with higher simulated current levels in the unilateral montages of the model head, and shorter electrode distances to the eye had lower PTs. The lowest mean PT and the lowest variability were found in the F7-F8 montage ( [Formula: see text]). Our results confirm the hypothesis that phosphenes are primarily of retinal origin, and they provide the first in vivo evidence that computer models of current flow using head models are a valid tool to estimate real current flow in the human eye and brain.

Indexed as

PhosphenesTranscranial Direct Current StimulationBrainElectric StimulationHumansMaleRetinaTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation

Identifiers

PMID34648453
PMCPMC8594910
OpenAlexW3207492950

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.