ArticleFrontiers in aging neuroscience2025
Polarity-dependent modulation of sleep oscillations and cortical excitability in aging.
Article in Frontiers in aging neuroscience, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: During non-rapid eye movement (NREM) sleep, cortical slow oscillation (SO; <1 Hz) and thalamic sleep spindle activity (12-15 Hz) interact through precise phase coupling to support memory consolidation. Slow oscillatory transcranial direct current stimulation (so-tDCS) can modulate these oscillations. Traditionally, anodal so-tDCS is used to depolarize the cortex during SO up-states, thereby promoting SO activity and SO-spindle coupling. However, intracranial findings suggest that SO down-states, characterized by cortical hyperpolarization, can trigger thalamic spindle bursts. This raises the hypothesis that cathodal so-tDCS, by promoting hyperpolarization, could selectively enhance down-states and more effectively improve SO-spindle coupling. Methods: We tested this hypothesis in 22 healthy older adults, a population known to exhibit diminished NREM oscillatory activity. Each participant received cathodal, anodal, and sham so-tDCS in separate nap sleep sessions. We quantified SO and spindle characteristics, their temporal coupling, and cortical excitation/inhibition (E/I) balance using EEG spectral slope. We also assessed individual circadian preference (chronotype) as a potential moderator. Results: We found that anodal so-tDCS improved SO-spindle synchrony and increased spindle power over sham in participants with intermediate or evening chronotypes, while cathodal so-tDCS did not enhance these oscillatory measures compared to sham, despite prolonging SO down-states. Anodal so-tDCS also shifted E/I balance toward increased excitability, indicating increased cortical excitability, whereas cathodal so-tDCS did not produce the anticipated opposite shift. Conclusion: In summary, anodal, but not cathodal, so-tDCS effectively enhanced thalamocortical interactions underlying memory consolidation. Furthermore, these findings highlight the importance of individual factors such as chronotype in brain stimulation responsiveness.
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.