Cited by 5,656Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation StudiesNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology ResearchNeuroscience and Neural Engineering

Excitability changes induced in the human motor cortex by weak transcranial direct current stimulation

Open access
Nitsche, M. A., Paulus, W.·2000·The Journal of Physiology

Abstract

In this paper we demonstrate in the intact human the possibility of a non-invasive modulation of motor cortex excitability by the application of weak direct current through the scalp. Excitability changes of up to 40 %, revealed by transcranial magnetic stimulation, were accomplished and lasted for several minutes after the end of current stimulation. Excitation could be achieved selectively by anodal stimulation, and inhibition by cathodal stimulation. By varying the current intensity and duration, the strength and duration of the after-effects could be controlled. The effects were probably induced by modification of membrane polarisation. Functional alterations related to post-tetanic potentiation, short-term potentiation and processes similar to postexcitatory central inhibition are the likely candidates for the excitability changes after the end of stimulation. Transcranial electrical stimulation using weak current may thus be a promising tool to modulate cerebral excitability in a non-invasive, painless, reversible, selective and focal way.

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 · 10.1111/j.1469-7793.2000.t01-1-00633.x

Cites

30 of 30 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
Nitsche, M. A., & Paulus, W.
Affiliations
University of Göttingen (DE)
Corresponding author
Nitsche, M. A.
Venue
The Journal of Physiology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2000-09
Volume
527
Issue
3
Pages
633-639
ISSN
  • 0022-3751 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-7793
OpenAlex
W2097273459
Cited by
5,656
References
29
Citations by year
2026: 264 · 2025: 352 · 2024: 344 · 2023: 329 · 2022: 354 · 2021: 455 · 2020: 449 · 2019: 426 · 2018: 361 · 2017: 357 · 2016: 380 · 2015: 315 · 2014: 263 · 2013: 274 · 2012: 195
FWCI
6.75
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The Journal of Physiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • GRO (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neural Engineering
Keywords
transcranial direct current stimulation, motor cortex excitability, non-invasive brain stimulation, anodal stimulation, cathodal stimulation, aftereffects, post-tetanic potentiation, short-term potentiation, membrane polarization, transcranial magnetic stimulation
MeSH terms
Adult, Electric Stimulation, Electromagnetic Fields, Female, Humans, Male, Motor Cortex, Evoked Potentials, Motor

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