Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 785

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 42 of the 42 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Variability in Response to Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation of the Motor Cortex

Open access
Wiethoff, Sarah, Hamada, Masashi, Rothwell, John C.·2014·Brain Stimulation
DOI 10.1016/j.brs.2014.02.003
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

BACKGROUND Responses to a number of different plasticity-inducing brain stimulation protocols are highly variable. However there is little data available on the variability of response to transcranial direct current stimulation (TDCS). OBJECTIVE We tested the effects of TDCS over the motor cortex on corticospinal excitability. We also examined whether an individual's response could be predicted from measurements of onset latency of motor evoked potential (MEP) following stimulation with different orientations of monophasic transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). METHODS Fifty-three healthy subjects participated in a crossover-design. Baseline latency measurements with different coil orientations and MEPs were recorded from the first dorsal interosseous muscle prior to the application of 10 min of 2 mA TDCS (0.057 mA/cm2). Thirty MEPs were measured every 5 min for up to half an hour after the intervention to assess after-effects on corticospinal excitability. RESULTS Anodal TDCS at 2 mA facilitated MEPs whereas there was no significant effect of 2 mA cathodal TDCS. A two-step cluster analysis suggested that approximately 50% individuals had only a minor, or no response to TDCS whereas the remainder had a facilitatory effect to both forms of stimulation. There was a significant correlation between the latency difference of MEPs (anterior-posterior stimulation minus latero-medial stimulation) and the response to anodal, but not cathodal TDCS. CONCLUSIONS The large variability in response to these TDCS protocols is in line with similar studies using other forms of non-invasive brain stimulation. The effects highlight the need to develop more robust protocols, and understand the individual factors that determine responsiveness.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.brs.2014.02.003

Cites

42 of 42 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 42 references

Cited by

See all 785

Metadata

Authors
Wiethoff, S., Hamada, M., & Rothwell, J. C.
Venue
Brain Stimulation
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2014-05
Volume
7
Issue
3
Pages
468-475
ISSN
  • 1876-4754 (ISSN-L)
  • 1935-861X
DOI
10.1016/j.brs.2014.02.003
OpenAlex
W2029338818
Cited by
785
References
42
FWCI
33.56
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Variability in Response to Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation of the Motor Cortex. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.brs.2014.02.003
The paper
Wiethoff, S., Hamada, M., & Rothwell, J. C. (2014). Variability in Response to Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation of the Motor Cortex. Brain Stimulation. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brs.2014.02.003

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.