AI Article Synopsis

  • tDCS has gained popularity in research and clinical practice due to its safety, ease of use, and low cost, but results regarding its effectiveness have been inconsistent and often hard to replicate.
  • Many of these issues are linked to variations in stimulation protocols across studies, but there's also a growing recognition of intra-study variability, particularly how individual differences among participants might affect outcomes.
  • Factors like personal biology, hormonal influences, and contextual elements related to task engagement and difficulty may help explain why only about half of participants respond positively to tDCS, suggesting that understanding these differences could improve future protocols.

Article Abstract

Due to its safety, portability, and cheapness, transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) use largely increased in research and clinical settings. Despite tDCS's wide application, previous works pointed out inconsistent and low replicable results, sometimes leading to extreme conclusions about tDCS's ineffectiveness in modulating behavioral performance across cognitive domains. Traditionally, this variability has been linked to significant differences in the stimulation protocols across studies, including stimulation parameters, target regions, and electrodes montage. Here, we reviewed and discussed evidence of heterogeneity emerging at the intra-study level, namely inter-individual differences that may influence the response to tDCS within each study. This source of variability has been largely neglected by literature, being results mainly analyzed at the group level. Previous research, however, highlighted that only a half-or less-of studies' participants could be classified as responders, being affected by tDCS in the expected direction. Stable and variable inter-individual differences, such as morphological and genetic features vs. hormonal/exogenous substance consumption, partially account for this heterogeneity. Moreover, variability comes from experiments' contextual elements, such as participants' engagement/baseline capacity and individual task difficulty. We concluded that increasing knowledge on inter-dividual differences rather than undermining tDCS effectiveness could enhance protocols' efficiency and reproducibility.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9139102PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/brainsci12050522DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

stable variable
8
inter-individual differences
8
tdcs
5
inter-individual variability
4
variability tdcs
4
tdcs effects
4
effects narrative
4
narrative review
4
review contribution
4
contribution stable
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!