The use of transcranial magnetic stimulation in cognitive neuroscience: A new synthesis of methodological issues

Sandrini, Marco; Umiltà, Carlo; Rusconi, Elena

doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2010.06.005

Cited by 288 publications

(288 citation statements)

References 244 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

283

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Importantly, our review focused on the off-line rTMS effects on WMexperiments that, in fact, evaluate the after-effects of brain stimulation on WM. Online rTMS paradigms usually show worsening of cognitive performance due to disruption of cortical activity (Sandrini et al, 2011); although several exemptions exist, for instance, accordingly to state-dependent activity (as exemplified above in (Silvanto, Cattaneo, et al, 2008)), or when TMS is delivered early in the time course of the trial, before the brain region was supposed to be activated (Grosbras & Paus, 2003).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…TDCS generates low-intensity electric fields (Datta et al, 2009) in the brain leading to small changes (<1 mV) (Radman, Ramos, Brumberg, & Bikson, 2009) in the membrane potential, thus influencing the frequency of spike timing and modifying net cortical excitability (Purpura & McMurtry, 1965) without triggering action potentials per se (Brunoni et al, 2012;Nitsche et al, 2008). In turn, rTMS causes disruptions in brain activity by delivering strong magnetic pulses to the cortex that pass through the skull and depolarize the underlying neurons of particular areas in the brain Repetitive TMS over the motor cortex facilitates or inhibits brain excitability according to the frequency of stimulation (respectively >1Hz and <1Hz) (Fregni & Pascual-Leone, 2007;George & Aston-Jones, 2010;Hallett, 2007) For cognitive functions, however, there are also other factors that determine rTMS effects, particularly the baseline activity state of the stimulated region ("state-dependency") (Sandrini, Umilta, & Rusconi, 2011;Silvanto, Cattaneo, Battelli, & Pascual-Leone, 2008;van de Ven & Sack, 2013). For instance, Soto et al (2012) observed that the application of TMS during a WM task respectively increased and decreased accuracy whether the cues were valid or invalid.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Working memory improvement with non-invasive brain stimulation of the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Brunoni

Vanderhasselt

2014

Brain and Cognition

542

402

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent studies have used non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) techniques, such as repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), to increase dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) activity and, consequently, working memory (WM) performance.. However, such experiments have yielded mixed results, possibly due to small sample sizes and heterogeneity of outcomes. Therefore, our aim was to perform a systematic review and metaanalyses on NIBS studies assessing the n-back task, which is a reliable index for WM. From the first data available to February 2013, we looked for sham-controlled, randomized studies that used NIBS over the DLPFC using the n-back task in PubMed/MEDLINE and other databases. Twelve studies (describing 33 experiments) matched our eligibility criteria. Active vs. sham NIBS was significantly associated with faster response times (RT), higher percentage of correct responses and lower percentage of error responses. However, meta-regressions showed that tDCS (vs. rTMS) presented an improvement only in RT. This could have occurred in part because almost all tDCS studies employed a crossover design (possibly more employed in tDCS over rTMS due to the reliable tDCS blinding) -this factor (study design) was also associated with no improvement in correct responses in the active vs. sham groups. To conclude, rTMS over the DLPFC significantly improved all measures of WM performance whereas tDCS significantly improved RT, but not the percentage of correct and error responses. Mechanistic insights on the role of DLPFC in WM are further discussed, as well as how NIBS techniques could be used in neuropsychiatric samples presenting WM deficits, such as major depression, dementia and schizophrenia.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Working memory improvement with non-invasive brain stimulation of the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Brunoni

Vanderhasselt

2014

Brain and Cognition

542

402

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It has been argued that rTMS and tDCS can either enhance or decrease excitability in targeted cortical regions depending on the parameters of stimulation employed (Chen et al, 1997;Galea, Jayaram, Ajagbe, & Celnik, 2009;Labruna et al, 2016;Woods et al, 2016) and the underlying intrinsic state of the stimulated brain networks (Dayan, Censor, Buch, Sandrini, & Cohen, 2013;Sandrini, Umilta, & Rusconi, 2011). tDCS has also been used as a tool to gain insight into brain-behavior interactions and to explore possible causal relationships between altered activity in relatively large regions of the brain and particular behaviors .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of tDCS on motor learning and memory formation: A consensus and critical position paper

Buch

Santarnecchi

Antal

et al. 2017

Clinical Neurophysiology

Self Cite

282

250

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Motor skills are required for activities of daily living. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) applied in association with motor skill learning has been investigated as a tool for enhancing training effects in health and disease. Here, we review the published literature investigating whether tDCS can facilitate the acquisition and retention of motor skills and adaptation. A majority of reports focused on the application of anodal tDCS over the primary motor cortex (M1) during motor skill acquisition, while some evaluated tDCS applied over the cerebellum during adaptation of existing motor skills. Work in multiple laboratories is under way to develop a mechanistic understanding of tDCS effects on different forms of learning, and to optimize stimulation protocols.Efforts are required to improve reproducibility and standardization. Overall, reproducibility remains to be fully tested, effect sizes with present techniques are moderate (up to d= 0.5) (Hashemirad, Zoghi, Fitzgerald, & Jaberzadeh, 2016) and the basis of inter-individual variability in tDCS effects is incompletely understood. It is recommended that future studies explicitly state in the Methods the exploratory (hypothesisgenerating) or hypothesis-driven (confirmatory) nature of the experimental designs. General research practices could be improved with prospective pre-registration of hypothesis-based investigations, more emphasis on detailed description of methods and use of post-publication open data repositories. A checklist is proposed for reporting tDCS investigations in a way that can improve efforts to assess reproducibility.

show abstract

“…To date, brain stimulation studies of rivalry have employed caloric vestibular stimulation (CVS; reviewed in Been et al, 2007, transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS; Sandrini et al, 2011;reviewed in Ngo et al, 2013), and transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS; Strüber et al, in press). For TMS, recent rivalry experiments (e.g., Carmel, Walsh et al, 2010;de Graaf et al, 2011;Kanai et al, 2011;Nojima et al, 2010) have adopted an 'offline' stimulation protocolthat is, stimulation applied prior to or in between sessions of rivalry presentation -compared with other studies that employed 'online' stimulation protocols -that is, TMS during BR viewing Pearson et al, 2007;Zaretskaya & Bartels, 2013;Zaretskaya et al, 2010; see also Nuruki et al, 2013).…”

Section: Compatibility With Brain Stimulation Techniquesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dichoptic Viewing Methods for Binocular Rivalry Research: Prospects for Large-Scale Clinical and Genetic Studies

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Binocular rivalry (BR) is an intriguing phenomenon that occurs when two different images are presented, one to each eye, resulting in alternation or rivalry between the percepts. The phenomenon has been studied for nearly 200 years, with renewed and intensive investigation over recent decades. The rate of perceptual switching has long been known to vary widely between individuals but to be relatively stable within individuals. A recent twin study demonstrated that individual variation in BR rate is under substantial genetic control, a finding that also represented the first report, using a large study, of genetic contribution for any post-retinal visual processing phenomenon. The twin study had been prompted by earlier work showing BR rate was slow in the heritable psychiatric condition, bipolar disorder (BD). Together, these studies suggested that slow BR may represent an endophenotype for BD, and heralded the advent of modern clinical and genetic studies of rivalry. This new focus has coincided with rapid advances in 3D display technology, but despite such progress, specific development of technology for rivalry research has been lacking. This review therefore compares different display methods for BR research across several factors, including viewing parameters, image quality, equipment cost, compatibility with other investigative methods, subject group, and sample size, with a focus on requirements specific to large-scale clinical and genetic studies. It is intended to be a resource for investigators new to BR research, such as clinicians and geneticists, and to stimulate the development of 3D display technology for advancing interdisciplinary studies of rivalry.

show abstract

The use of transcranial magnetic stimulation in cognitive neuroscience: A new synthesis of methodological issues

Cited by 288 publications

References 244 publications

Working memory improvement with non-invasive brain stimulation of the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Working memory improvement with non-invasive brain stimulation of the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Effects of tDCS on motor learning and memory formation: A consensus and critical position paper

Dichoptic Viewing Methods for Binocular Rivalry Research: Prospects for Large-Scale Clinical and Genetic Studies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About