Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35601898›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in human neuroscience2022

Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Targeting the Entire Motor Network Does Not Increase Corticospinal Excitability.

Joris Van der Cruijsen, Zeb D Jonker, Eleni-Rosalina Andrinopoulou, Jessica E Wijngaarden, Ditte A Tangkau, Joke H M Tulen, Maarten A Frens, Gerard M Ribbers, Ruud W Selles

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 52% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. 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

9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Joris Van der CruijsenDepartment of Rehabilitation Medicine, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Netherlands.
Zeb D JonkerDepartment of Rehabilitation Medicine, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Netherlands.
Eleni-Rosalina AndrinopoulouDepartment of Biostatistics, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Netherlands.
Jessica E WijngaardenDepartment of Rehabilitation Medicine, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Netherlands.
Ditte A TangkauDepartment of Rehabilitation Medicine, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Netherlands.
Joke H M TulenDepartment of Psychiatry, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Netherlands.
Maarten A FrensDepartment of Neuroscience, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Netherlands.
Gerard M RibbersDepartment of Rehabilitation Medicine, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Netherlands.
Ruud W SellesDepartment of Rehabilitation Medicine, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Netherlands.
Erasmus MC · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) over the contralateral primary motor cortex of the target muscle (conventional tDCS) has been described to enhance corticospinal excitability, as measured with transcranial magnetic stimulation. Recently, tDCS targeting the brain regions functionally connected to the contralateral primary motor cortex (motor network tDCS) was reported to enhance corticospinal excitability more than conventional tDCS. We compared the effects of motor network tDCS, 2 mA conventional tDCS, and sham tDCS on corticospinal excitability in 21 healthy participants in a randomized, single-blind within-subject study design. We applied tDCS for 12 min and measured corticospinal excitability with TMS before tDCS and at 0, 15, 30, 45, and 60 min after tDCS. Statistical analysis showed that neither motor network tDCS nor conventional tDCS significantly increased corticospinal excitability relative to sham stimulation. Furthermore, the results did not provide evidence for superiority of motor network tDCS over conventional tDCS. Motor network tDCS seems equally susceptible to the sources of intersubject and intrasubject variability previously observed in response to conventional tDCS.

Indexed as

corticospinal excitabilitymotor evoked potentialmotor networktDCSTMS

Identifiers

PMID35601898
PMCPMC9114302
OpenAlexW4225425544

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.