ArticleBrain and behavior2025
Effects of Cerebellar Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on Cerebellar Brain Inhibition as a Function of TMS Coil Orientation.
Article in Brain and behavior, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionCerebellar brain inhibition (CBI) is a way to quantify the cerebellar influence on the motor cortex in humans. Studies suggest that the orientation of the transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) coil influences which motor networks are activated. This study investigated the influence of cerebellar transcranial direct current stimulation (ctDCS) on CBI as a function of coil orientation (anterior-posterior [AP] vs. posterior-anterior [PA]). An interstimulus interval (ISI) of 7 ms (CBI-AP-7) was used for AP orientation and 5 ms (CBI-PA-5) for PA orientation.
methodsYoung and healthy participants received anodal, cathodal, or sham ctDCS treatment for 15 min on three different days. On each day, CBI was determined for both coil positions immediately after and 30, 60, and 120 min after ctDCS application.
resultsFor CBI-PA-5, no significant ctDCS effect was detected. For CBI-AP-7, there was an increase in CBI by anodal ctDCS and a decrease in CBI by cathodal ctDCS, although the latter did not reach statistical significance.
conclusionFindings provide further support that different cerebello-cerebral motor networks may be activated in CBI-AP-7 and CBI-PA-5, with only CBI-AP-7 being significantly affected by ctDCS. CBI-AP-7 may be a more sensitive tool for investigating CBI effects than the CBI-PA-5 procedure, which is most commonly used.
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.