Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37043484›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2023

Identifying the engagement of a brain network during a targeted tDCS-fMRI experiment using a machine learning approach.

Anant Shinde, Sovesh Mohapatra, Gottfried Schlaug

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. 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

3 authors.

Anant ShindeDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, University of Massachusetts Amherst, Amherst, Massachusetts, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-7196-5788
Sovesh MohapatraInstitute of Applied Life Sciences, University of Massachusetts Amherst, Amherst, Massachusetts, United States of America.
Gottfried SchlaugDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, University of Massachusetts Amherst, Amherst, Massachusetts, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-8637-7356

Funding

TRANScranial direct current stimulation for POst-stroke motor Recover - a phase II sTudy (TRANSPORT 2)U01NS102353 · NINDS · MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA · PI FENG, WUWEI, SCHLAUG, GOTTFRIED · 2018 to 2023
$8.5M
Imaging the Neural Effects of Transcranial Direct Current StimulationR01MH111874 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS AMHERST · PI SCHLAUG, GOTTFRIED · 2016 to 2019
$2.2M
NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH111874NINDS NIH HHS U01 NS102353
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) can noninvasively modulate behavior, cognition, and physiologic brain functions depending on polarity and dose of stimulation as well as montage of electrodes. Concurrent tDCS-fMRI presents a novel way to explore the parameter space of non-invasive brain stimulation and to inform the experimenter as well as the participant if a targeted brain region or a network of spatially separate brain regions has been engaged and modulated. We compared a multi-electrode (ME) with a single electrode (SE) montage and both active conditions with a no-stimulation (NS) control condition to assess the engagement of a brain network and the ability of different electrode montages to modulate network activity. The multi-electrode montage targeted nodal regions of the right Arcuate Fasciculus Network (AFN) with anodal electrodes placed over the skull position of the posterior superior temporal/middle temporal gyrus (STG/MTG), supramarginal gyrus (SMG), posterior inferior frontal gyrus (IFG) and a return cathodal electrode over the left supraorbital region. In comparison, the single electrode montage used only one anodal electrode over a nodal brain region of the AFN, but varied the location between STG/MTG, SMG, and posterior IFG for different participants. Whole-brain rs-fMRI was obtained approximately every three seconds. The tDCS-stimulator was turned on at 3 minutes after the scanning started. A 4D rs-fMRI data set was converted to dynamic functional connectivity (DFC) matrices using a set of ROI pairs belonging to the AFN as well as other unrelated brain networks. In this study, we evaluated the performance of five algorithms to classify the DFC matrices from the three conditions (ME, SE, NS) into three different categories. The highest accuracy of 0.92 was obtained for the classification of the ME condition using the K Nearest Neighbor (KNN) algorithm. In other words, applying the classification algorithm allowed us to identify the engagement of the AFN and the ME condition was the best montage to achieve such an engagement. The top 5 ROI pairs that made a major contribution to the classification of participant's rs-fMRI data were identified using model performance parameters; ROI pairs were mainly located within the right AFN. This proof-of-concept study using a classification algorithm approach can be expanded to create a near real-time feedback system at a participant level to detect the engagement and modulation of a brain network that spans multiple brain lobes.

Indexed as

Transcranial Direct Current StimulationBrainElectrodesHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingPrefrontal Cortex

Identifiers

PMID37043484
PMCPMC10124825

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.