Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35551431›Full record

ArticleExperimental brain research2022

Comparing amplitudes of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) to the sensorimotor cortex during swallowing.

Lindsay Griffin, Erin Kamarunas, Christina Kuo, Cynthia O'Donoghue

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Experimental brain research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 47% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Multimodal Neural Assessment for Predicting Post-Stroke Dysphagia: Identifying Critical Risk Factors Using Combined Indicators.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2025
    Article
  2. Impact of rTMS and iTBS on Cerebral Hemodynamics and Swallowing in Unilateral Stroke: Insights from fNIRS.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2025
    Article
  3. 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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Lindsay GriffinSchool of Communication, Communication Sciences and Disorders, Emerson College, 120 Boylston St., Boston, MA, 02116, USA. lindsay_griffin@emerson.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6450-3606
Erin KamarunasCollege of Health and Behavioral Studies, Communication Sciences and Disorders, James Madison University, 235 Martin Luther King Jr. Way, Harrisonburg, VA, 22807, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8886-7930
Christina KuoCollege of Health and Behavioral Studies, Communication Sciences and Disorders, James Madison University, 235 Martin Luther King Jr. Way, Harrisonburg, VA, 22807, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9308-5936
Cynthia O'DonoghueCollege of Health and Behavioral Studies, Communication Sciences and Disorders, James Madison University, 235 Martin Luther King Jr. Way, Harrisonburg, VA, 22807, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1261-3480
James Madison University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTranscranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) can alter cortical excitability, making it a useful tool for promoting neuroplasticity in dysphagia rehabilitation. Clinical trials show functional improvements in swallowing following anodal tDCS despite varying dosing parameters and outcomes. The aim of the current study was to determine the most effective amplitude criterion (e.g., 0 mA [sham/control], 1 mA, 2 mA) of anodal tDCS for upregulating the swallowing sensorimotor cortex.

methodAs a novel paradigm, tDCS, functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS), and surface electromyography (sEMG) were simultaneously administered while participants completed a swallowing task. This allowed for measurement of the cortical hemodynamic response and submental muscle contraction before, during, and after tDCS. At the conclusion of the study, participants were asked to rate their level of discomfort associated with tDCS using a visual analog scale.

resultsThere was no significant difference in the hemodynamic response by time or amplitude. However, post-hoc analyses indicated that in the post-stimulation period, changes to the hemodynamic response in the left (stimulated) hemisphere were significantly different for the groups receiving 1 mA and 2 mA of tDCS compared to baseline. Participants receiving 1 mA of tDCS demonstrated reduced hemodynamic response. There was no significant difference in submental muscle contraction during or after tDCS regardless of amplitude. Anodal tDCS was well tolerated in healthy adults with no difference among participant discomfort scores across tDCS amplitude.

conclusionsDuring a swallowing task, healthy volunteers receiving 1 mA of anodal tDCS demonstrated a suppressed hemodynamic response during and after stimulation whereas those receiving 2 mA of anodal tDCS had an increase in the hemodynamic response. tDCS remains a promising tool in dysphagia rehabilitation, but dosing parameters require further clarification.

Indexed as

Deglutition DisordersMotor CortexSensorimotor CortexTranscranial Direct Current StimulationAdultDeglutitionHumansDysphagiafNIRSFunctional near-infrared spectroscopySwallowingtDCSTranscranial direct current stimulation

Identifiers

PMID35551431
OpenAlexW4280566697

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.