Titrating the neuroplastic effects of cathodal transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) over the primary motor cortex
Abstract
Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) non-invasively induces polarity-dependent excitability alterations in the human motor cortex lasting for more than an hour after stimulation. Clinical applications with encouraging results have been reported in several pilot studies, but the optimal stimulation protocols remain to be determined. This is also important because the efficacy and directionality of tDCS effects follow non-linear rules regarding neuroplastic effects for the stimulation parameters duration and intensity. In this study, we systemically explored the association between tDCS, these parameters and induced after-effects on motor cortex excitability. Cathodal tDCS was applied in four different intensities (sham, 1, 2 and 3 mA) and three durations (15, 20 and 30 mins) in 16 young healthy subjects and the after-effects were monitored with TMS-induced motor evoked potentials (MEP) until the next day evening after stimulation. The results of the repeated measures ANOVA conducted to disentangle the effects of tDCS intensity and duration show a main effect of intensity in which 1 mA and 3 mA stimulation induced a reduction of MEP amplitudes, but 2 mA resulted in excitability enhancement. The results of a secondary ANOVA conducted to compare if active stimulation effects differ from those of sham stimulation revealed a significant main effect of tDCS condition in which 1 mA-15 min, 1 mA-30 min and 3 mA-20 min cathodal tDCS induced LTD-like plasticity, while LTP-like…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
In younger adults, applying 2mA of current for 20 minutes to the motor cortex increases cortical excitability underneath both the anode and cathode.
“In younger adults, applying 2mA of current for 20 minutes to the motor cortex increases cortical excitability underneath both the anode and cathode [55, 56].”
From Primary outcome from the augmenting cognitive training in older adults study (ACT): A tDCS and cognitive training randomized clinical trial (2023) · cites this paper as [56]
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 51 · Cited by 175
- Authors
- Mosayebi Samani, M., Agboada, D., Jamil, A., Kuo, M.-F., & Nitsche, M. A.
- Affiliations
- Leibniz Research Centre for Working Environment and Human Factors (DE)
- BG University Hospital Bergmannsheil Bochum (DE)
- Corresponding author
- Nitsche, Michael A.
- Venue
- Cortex
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2019-10
- Volume
- 119
- Pages
- 350-361
- ISSN
- 0010-9452 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2944770398
- Cited by
- 175
- References
- 51
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 23 · 2024: 24 · 2023: 23 · 2022: 24 · 2021: 35 · 2020: 31 · 2019: 7
- FWCI
- 10.68
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Cortex (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Neurology › Neurological disorders and treatments
- Keywords
- transcranial direct current stimulation, cathodal tDCS, primary motor cortex, neuroplasticity, motor cortex excitability, stimulation intensity, stimulation duration, long-term potentiation, long-term depression, motor evoked potentials, aftereffects, stimulation protocol optimization
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Female, Humans, Male, Motor Cortex, Neuronal Plasticity, Evoked Potentials, Motor, Neurosurgical Procedures, Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation, 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