ArticlebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology2024
Non-invasive neuromodulation of cerebello-hippocampal volume-behavior relationships.
Article in bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Differently increased volumes of multiple brain areas inFrontiers in neuroanatomy · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
The study here explores the link between transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and brain-behavior relationships. We propose that tDCS may indirectly influence the complex relationships between brain volume and behavior. We focused on the dynamics between the hippocampus (HPC) and cerebellum (CB) in cognitive processes, a relationship with significant implications for understanding memory and motor skills. Seventy-four young adults (mean age: 22±0.42 years, mean education: 14.7±0.25 years) were randomly assigned to receive either anodal, cathodal, or sham stimulation. Following stimulation, participants completed computerized tasks assessing working memory and sequence learning in a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) environment. We investigated the statistical interaction between CB and HPC volumes. Our findings showed that individuals with larger cerebellar volumes had shorter reaction times (RT) on a high-load working memory task in the sham stimulation group. In contrast, the anodal stimulation group exhibited faster RTs during the low-load working memory condition. These RT differences were associated with the cortical volumetric interaction between CB-HPC. Literature suggests that anodal stimulation down-regulates the CB and here, those with larger volumes perform more quickly, suggesting the potential need for additional cognitive resources to compensate for cerebellar downregulation. This new insight suggests that tDCS can aid in revealing structure-function relationships, due to greater performance variability, especially in young adults. It may also reveal new targets of interest in the study of aging or in diseases where there is also greater behavioral variability.
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.