ArticleThe European journal of neuroscience2022
Responsiveness to left-prefrontal tDCS varies according to arousal levels.
Article in The European journal of neuroscience, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Neurocognitive function as outcome and predictor for prefrontal transcranial direct current stimulation in major depressive disorder: an analysis from the DepressionDC trial.European archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience · 2025Trial
- Mechanistic insights into combined prefrontal tDCS and vagal nerve stimulation for stress regulation.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Review
- Learning from missteps: Potential of transcranial electrical stimulation in neuropsychological rehabilitation.Journal of neuropsychology · 2025Review
- Transcranial direct current stimulation for Parkinson's disease: systematic review and meta-analysis of motor and cognitive effects.NPJ Parkinson's disease · 2024Article
- Lack of effects of online HD-tDCS over the left or right DLPFC in an associative memory and metamemory monitoring task.PloS one · 2024Article
- Individual response to transcranial direct current stimulation as a function of working memory capacity and electrode montage.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2023Article
- Differential effects of remotely supervised transcranial direct current stimulation on recognition memory depending on task order.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2023Article
- Responsiveness to left-prefrontal tDCS varies according to arousal levels.The European journal of neuroscience · 2022Article
- Older adults with lower working memory capacity benefit from transcranial direct current stimulation when combined with working memory training: A preliminary study.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2022Article
- Mind matters: A narrative review on affective state-dependency in non-invasive brain stimulation.International journal of clinical and health psychology : IJCHPArticle
- The impact of transcranial direct current stimulation combined with virtual reality-based mindfulness on attention and inhibitory control in healthy individuals.International journal of clinical and health psychology : IJCHPArticle
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
Over the past two decades, the postulated modulatory effects of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) on the human brain have been extensively investigated. However, recent concerns on reliability of tDCS effects have been raised, principally due to reduced replicability and to interindividual variability in response to tDCS. These inconsistencies are likely due to the interplay between the level of induced cortical excitability and unaccounted structural and state-dependent functional factors. On these grounds, we aimed at verifying whether the behavioural effects induced by a common tDCS montage (F3-rSOA) were influenced by the participants' arousal levels, as part of a broader mechanism of state-dependency. Pupillary dynamics were recorded during an auditory oddball task while applying either a sham or real tDCS. The tDCS effects were evaluated as a function of subjective and physiological arousal predictors (STAI-Y State scores and pre-stimulus pupil size, respectively). We showed that prefrontal tDCS hindered task learning effects on response speed such that performance improvement occurred during sham, but not real stimulation. Moreover, both subjective and physiological arousal predictors significantly explained performance during real tDCS, with interaction effects showing performance improvement only with moderate arousal levels; likewise, pupil response was affected by real tDCS according to the ongoing levels of arousal, with reduced dilation during higher arousal trials. These findings highlight the potential role of arousal in shaping the neuromodulatory outcome, thus emphasizing a more careful interpretation of null or negative results while also encouraging more individually tailored tDCS applications based on arousal levels, especially in clinical populations.
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.