Trial reportBrain and behavior2025
Variant Target Effects on Motor Learning With M1 Anodal tDCS.
Trial report in Brain and behavior, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The use of transcranial direct current stimulation to facilitate motor skill reactivations of a choice reaction time task in adults.Physiological reports · 2025Trial
- M1 a-tDCS does not acutely enhance motor skill acquisition of a dexterous, timing-based videogame task in adults.Physiological reports · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeLearning a motor skill usually involves practicing the same task repetitively with the same end target or goal. Many overhand throwing studies have documented accelerated learning when the task is practiced with the addition of anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (a-tDCS) to the primary motor cortex (M1). However, these studies use the same target to throw at each time. The purpose of this study was to replicate previous work where a-tDCS applied to M1 improved performance of a dart-throwing task quicker than with SHAM stimulation, but to have subjects throw to different targets on the dartboard with each throw.
methodSixty-four healthy subjects practiced a dart-throwing task with their non-dominant arm. On the first visit, the subjects performed a pre- and post-test, as well as a 20-min practice in between, where they were randomized to receive 2 mA a-tDCS over the contralateral M1 to the throwing hand (n = 33) or very brief stimulation (SHAM, n = 31). The subjects repeated testing 1 and 24 h later to test for retention. FINDING: Both groups reduced their endpoint error and the variability in endpoint error (throwing consistency) over time. There were no significant differences between a-tDCS and SHAM conditions in either of these measures.
conclusionUnlike many previous studies, stimulation of M1 with a-tDCS did not accelerate learning of a dart-throwing task when the targets were constantly changed. It is hypothesized that this could have been due to the stimulation intensity being too high and possibly having a counter-regulatory effect on cortical activity, or it could have been due to some other learning mechanism that requires more time and practice to develop when the endpoint or target of the task changes. Alternatively, this task may have benefited from stimulation of the cerebellum, where it is known that motor adaptation can efficiently update and improve movements.
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.