ArticleScientific reports2026
Polarity-dependent modulation of sensory circuits by cerebellar tDCS: local and distant effects.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. 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
- Update of
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Cerebellar transcranial direct current stimulation (Cb-tDCS) is a promising tool for non-invasive modulation of cerebellar function and is under investigation for treating cerebellum-related disorders. However, its local and remote effects on sensory processing remain poorly understood. We investigated the immediate and long-term effects of Cb-tDCS on sensory-evoked responses in the cerebellum and primary somatosensory cortex (S1) of awake mice. Sensory-evoked potentials (SEPs) were recorded in Crus I/II and S1 during and after short (15 s) or long (20 min) sessions of anodal or cathodal Cb-tDCS. In addition, vGLUT1 and GAD65-67 immunoreactivity were quantified, and spectral changes in local field potentials were assessed. Anodal and cathodal Cb-tDCS respectively induced an immediate increase and decrease in the trigeminal component in Crus I/II but no aftereffects were observed 20 min post-stimulation. In S1, Cb-tDCS resulted in polarity and intensity-dependent modulation of the N1 component during stimulation, which was opposite to the changes induced in Crus I/II, as well as a polarity-dependent modulation after stimulation. In addition, anodal Cb-tDCS was associated with reduced GAD65-67 immunoreactivity in S1, whereas vGLUT1 remained unchanged. While power spectrum analysis revealed no changes in Crus I/II, Cb-tDCS induced polarity-dependent post-stimulation changes in S1 spectral power, with higher values after cathodal stimulation. These findings show that Cb-tDCS differentially modulates sensory processing in cerebellar and cortical circuits. While cerebellar effects are mainly transient, stimulation induces longer-lasting changes in the remote cortical area investigated, S1. This underscores the need to consider both local and distant network effects when applying Cb-tDCS in translational and clinical settings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42426098What 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.