ArticleIBRO neuroscience reports2023
Less might be more: 1 mA but not 1.5 mA of tDCS improves tactile orientation discrimination.
Article in IBRO neuroscience reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Does Anodal Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Over the Primary Motor Cortex Really Enhance Motor Sequence Learning?Biological psychiatry global open science · 2026Article
- The Role of the Anterior Temporal Lobe in Reading: An HD-tDCS Study.Neurobiology of language (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2026Article
- Concurrent Bilateral M1 and Anodal Cerebellar tDCS Effects on Learning of a Bimanual Video Game Task.Brain and behavior · 2025Article
- Optimizing cognitive control through the interaction between stimulation intensity and duration in single-site and dual-site tDCS.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- The effects of right temporoparietal junction stimulation on embodiment, presence, and performance in teleoperation.AIMS neuroscience · 2024Article
- Individual differences and creative ideation: neuromodulatory signatures of mindset and response inhibition.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a frequently used brain stimulation method; however, studies on tactile perception using tDCS are inconsistent, which might be explained by the variations in endogenous and exogenous parameters that influence tDCS. Objectives: We aimed to investigate the effect of one of these endogenous parameters-the tDCS amplitude-on tactile perception. Methods: We conducted this experiment on 28 undergraduates/graduates aged 18-36 years. In separate sessions, participants received 20 min of 1 mA or 1.5 mA current tDCS in a counterbalanced order. Half of the participants received anodal tDCS of the left SI coupled with cathodal tDCS of the right SI, and this montage was reversed for the other half. Pre- and post-tDCS tactile discrimination performance was assessed using the Grating Orientation Task (GOT). In this task, plastic domes with gratings of different widths cut into their surfaces are placed on the fingertip, and participants have to rate the orientation of the gratings. Results: Linear modeling with amplitude, dome, and session as within factors and montage as between factors revealed the following: significant main effects of grating width, montage, and session and a marginally significant interaction effect of session and amplitude. Posthoc t-tests indicated that performance in GOT improved after 1 mA but not 1.5 mA tDCS independent of the montage pattern of the electrodes. Conclusion: Increasing the stimulation amplitude from 1 mA to 1.5 mA does not facilitate the tDCS effect on GOT performance. On the contrary, the effect seemed more robust for the lower-current amplitude.
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.