Cited by 113Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation StudiesElectroconvulsive Therapy StudiesEEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces

Modeling transcranial electrical stimulation in the aging brain

Open access
Indahlastari, Aprinda, Albizu, Alejandro, O’Shea, Andrew, Forbes, Megan A., Nissim, Nicole R., Kraft, Jessica N., Evangelista, Nicole D., Hausman, Hanna K. +1 more·2020·Brain Stimulation

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Varying treatment outcomes in transcranial electrical stimulation (tES) recipients may depend on the amount of current reaching the brain. Brain atrophy associated with normal aging may affect tES current delivery to the brain. Computational models have been employed to compute predicted tES current inside the brain. This study is the largest study that uses computational models to investigate tES field distribution in healthy older adults. METHODS: Individualized head models from 587 healthy older adults (mean = 73.9years, 51-95 years) were constructed to create field maps. Two electrode montages (F3-F4, M1-SO) with 2 mA input current were modeled using ROAST with modified codes. A customized template of healthy older adults, the UFAB-587, was created from the same dataset and used to warp individual brains into the same space. Warped models were analyzed to determine the relationship between computed field measures, brain atrophy and age. MAIN RESULTS: = 0.0829, p = 1.14e-12). Field pattern showed negative correlation with age in brain sub-regions including part of DLPFC and precentral gyrus. Mediation analysis revealed that the negative correlation between age and current density is partially mediated by brain-to-CSF ratio. CONCLUSIONS: Computed field measures showed decreasing amount of tES current reaching the brain with increasing atrophy. Therefore, adjusting current dose by modifying tES stimulation parameters in older adults based on degree of atrophy may be necessary to achieve desired stimulation benefits. Results from this study may inform future tES application in healthy older adults.

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.2020.02.007

Cites

47 of 47 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Indahlastari, A., Albizu, A., O’Shea, A., Forbes, M. A., Nissim, N. R., Kraft, J. N., Evangelista, N. D., Hausman, H. K., & Woods, A. J.
Affiliations
  • University of Florida Health (US)
  • University of Pennsylvania (US)
Corresponding author
Indahlastari, Aprinda
Venue
Brain Stimulation
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-05
Volume
13
Issue
3
Pages
664-674
ISSN
  • 1876-4754 (ISSN-L)
  • 1935-861X
OpenAlex
W3004493719
Cited by
113
References
47
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 18 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 25 · 2020: 9 · 2012: 1
FWCI
5.90
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Brain stimulation (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • Janssen Research and Development
  • University of Southern California
  • GE Healthcare
  • National Institutes of Health (K01AG050707, R01AG054077, U01 AG024904)
  • Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative
  • Merck
  • National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering (1U54MH091657)
  • Fujirebio US
  • NIH Blueprint for Neuroscience Research
  • H. Lundbeck A/S
  • Genentech
  • IXICO
  • Johnson and Johnson
  • McDonnell Center for Systems Neuroscience
  • National Institute on Aging
  • Northern California Institute for Research and Education
  • U.S. Department of Defense (W81XWH-12-2-0012)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Electroconvulsive Therapy Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › EEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
Keywords
transcranial electrical stimulation, brain aging, brain atrophy, roast, healthy older adults, medial prefrontal cortex, precentral gyrus, mediation analysis
MeSH terms
Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Aging, Brain, Computer Simulation, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Middle Aged, Finite Element Analysis, Imaging, Three-Dimensional, Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation

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