ライフサイエンスコーパス: tDCS

1 tDCS augmented synergy learning, leading subsequently to

2 tDCS creates an electric field that weakly modulates the

3 tDCS was administered over the right dorsolateral prefro

4 tDCS was applied over DLPFC while subjects performed a c

5 tDCS was applied to the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex,

6 tDCS was delivered via bi-frontal target electrodes and

7 n of 1.5 mA anodal (n = 18) or sham (n = 14) tDCS applied to the right posterolateral cerebellum.

8 Both groups showed a tDCS-induced side effect-impaired executive control in a

9 Taking into account tDCS electrode size and the central position of area PFm

10 Active tDCS also enhanced swallowing behaviour, increasing the

11 Active tDCS increased HPTh as compared to sham (MD = 1.93) and

12 Active tDCS increased PMEPs bilaterally (F1,14 = 7.4, P = 0.017

13 Immediately after stimulation, active tDCS, as compared with sham tDCS, did not significantly

14 During stimulation, active tDCS, as compared with sham tDCS, elevated prefrontal N-

15 After tDCS or sham stimulation on the first and the last day o

16 ments from baseline to at least 5 days after tDCS intervention and motor practise.

17 hm recognition memory task immediately after tDCS.

18 he observation of enhanced LTP and PPF after tDCS demonstrates that non-invasive electrical stimulati

19 n plasticity following a combined MI-BCI and tDCS intervention in chronic subcortical stroke patients

20 combination of detailed behavioral, EMG, and tDCS techniques clarifies the neurophysiology of impulse

21 Escitalopram and tDCS were both superior to placebo (difference vs. place

22 Anodal tDCS over right DLPFC was associated with a significant

23 amplitude of somatosensory MMN after anodal tDCS (F(1,9) = 8.98, P < 0.02, mean difference anodal pr

24 alanced, crossover design, we applied anodal tDCS (atDCS), cathodal tDCS (ctDCS), and sham tDCS (stDC

25 We applied anodal tDCS over the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC

26 to an improvement in performance, but anodal tDCS over the left SMG had no significant effect.

27 ement of excitability in the dlPFC by anodal tDCS can be associated with blurred detail memory.

28 One week of daily anodal tDCS reduced overall caloric intake by 14% in comparison

29 We found that excitatory anodal tDCS applied over the cerebellum increased skill learnin

30 t deterioration in pianists following anodal tDCS over the contralateral cortex and cathodal tDCS ove

31 ffects on pitch memory were found for anodal tDCS over the right SMG or sham condition.

32 emory the opposite pattern was found; anodal tDCS over the right SMG led to an improvement in perform

33 decreased by non-invasive bi-frontal anodal tDCS in healthy humans.

34 otocols: anodal tDCS applied over M1, anodal tDCS over DLPFC, sham tDCS over M1, sham tDCS over DLPFC

35 generally good reliability of 1.0 mA anodal tDCS (ICC(2,1) = 0.74 over the first 30 min).

36 ity correlated negatively with 1.0 mA anodal tDCS effects on excitability.

37 in the early after-effects of 1.0 mA anodal tDCS, which may be of practical relevance for future opt

38 nations for the behavioral effects of anodal tDCS applied to the left DLPFC in terms of modulating fu

39 reduced only after a longer period of anodal tDCS in individuals with obesity.

40 efore and after the administration of anodal tDCS over right parietal cortex.

41 applied during encoding of pictures, anodal tDCS increased whereas cathodal stimulation reduced the

42 t 2 confirmed this second prediction: anodal tDCS of the TPJ improved lie detection specifically when

43 either of five stimulation protocols: anodal tDCS applied over M1, anodal tDCS over DLPFC, sham tDCS

44 enhanced ToM in females that received anodal tDCS over the mPFC compared with females that received t

45 n activity.We tested whether repeated anodal tDCS targeted at the left DLPFC (compared with sham tDCS

46 ed with sham or cathodal stimulation, anodal tDCS led to significantly better working memory performa

47 Relative to sham tDCS, anodal tDCS increased activation in right Crus I/II during sema

48 les.Relative to sham tDCS, short-term anodal tDCS did not influence ad libitum intake of food from th

49 .01), after long-term tDCS.Short-term anodal tDCS of the left DLPFC did not have an immediate effect

50 The present study demonstrates that anodal tDCS applied to the left dlPFC improves deficient cognit

51 otocols was observed, suggesting that anodal tDCS had little effect on learning the bimanual task reg

52 study was to test the hypothesis that anodal tDCS over the medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC) selectivel

53 The results showed that anodal tDCS over the mPFC enhances ToM in females but not in ma

54 the previously reported findings that anodal tDCS reduces GABA concentration and increases functional

55 In the anodal tDCS group, compared with the sham group, VAS ratings fo

56 ments after acute stress and point to anodal tDCS as a promising tool to reduce cognitive deficits re

57 correlates of dual and unihemispheric anodal tDCS effects in 20 healthy older subjects in a randomize

58 With anodal tDCS, all active intensities resulted in equivalent faci

59 fields linearly proportional to the applied tDCS current, our approach opens a new avenue for direct

60 We find that applying tDCS to right prefrontal cortex improves monkeys' perfor

61 ates do not change within the targeted area, tDCS does induce large low-frequency oscillations in the

62 Thus, we propose that specifically because tDCS is diffuse, weak and sustained it can boost connect

63 capacity for synergistic interaction between tDCS and pharmacologic mGluR5 facilitation.

64 esting a dose-dependent relationship between tDCS intensity and its effect on synaptic plasticity.

65 Bihemispheric tDCS was applied to M1 of healthy, right-handed human pa

66 us finger movements induced by bihemispheric tDCS are expertise-dependent.

67 Hence, bihemispheric tDCS may be a promising adjunct to neurorehabilitative t

68 t hands before and after receiving bilateral tDCS over the primary motor cortices.

69 For both tDCS polarities, the excitability after-effects did not

70 ue, which detects magnetic fields induced by tDCS currents.

71 e amplitude of auditory MMN was unchanged by tDCS.

72 mplitude of somatosensory MMN after cathodal tDCS (F(1,9) = 7.15, P < 0.03, mean difference cathodal

73 ge (0.5-2.0 mA) for both anodal and cathodal tDCS in a sham-controlled repeated measures design, moni

74 S over the contralateral cortex and cathodal tDCS over the ipsilateral cortex compared with the sham

75 teral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) and cathodal tDCS over the right DLPFC for 30 minutes, one of the mos

76 skill learning relative to sham and cathodal tDCS specifically by increasing on-line rather than off-

77 e divided into groups of anodal and cathodal tDCS.

78 plastic after-effects of anodal and cathodal tDCS.

79 ct of intensity for both anodal and cathodal tDCS.

80 gn, we applied anodal tDCS (atDCS), cathodal tDCS (ctDCS), and sham tDCS (stDCS) over the left sensor

81 effects relative to sham while for cathodal tDCS, only 1.0 mA resulted in sustained excitability dim

82 The findings support exploration of cathodal tDCS as a treatment of neurologic conditions characteriz

83 Participants who received cathodal tDCS were more likely to solve the problems that require

84 In contrast, activity-reducing cathodal tDCS apparently acted as a noise filter inhibiting the d

85 We conclude that cathodal tDCS over the left DLPFC might facilitate the relaxation

86 After anodal, but not cathodal, tDCS, we found a reduced item recognition capacity toget

87 Here, in humans, we delivered cerebellar tDCS to modulate its activity during novel motor skill t

88 vioral and neural consequences of cerebellar tDCS during a sentence completion task.

89 important implications for using cerebellar tDCS as an intervention to speed up motor skill acquisit

90 es during neuromodulation, we first combined tDCS and a tonic pain model with concurrent arterial spi

91 ted an online and offline protocol combining tDCS and magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS) in 17 hea

92 Specifically, research combining tDCS with electrophysiology is showing that the long-las

93 In contrast, tDCS impaired reaction times for low mathematics anxiety

94 ore focal current delivery than conventional tDCS, to clarify the causal involvement of the DLPFC in

95 m 20 to 25 were examined during 8 d of daily tDCS or a sham stimulation.

96 Based on these data, tDCS might be suitable to support the effects of behavio

97 target brain region during transcranial DCS (tDCS).

98 mantic information, and that high-definition tDCS to an associative cortical hub can selectively modu

99 lts show that the proposed technique detects tDCS induced magnetic fields as small as a nanotesla at

100 older adults and thus might help to develop tDCS interventions tailored to the aging brain.SIGNIFICA

101 nd marks an important step toward developing tDCS as a tool for remediating the performance-monitorin

102 For excitability-diminishing tDCS and PAS, aftereffects were abolished or converted t

103 The finding that DLPFC tDCS acutely alters the processing of threatening inform

104 eft dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (L-DLPFC) tDCS induced an analgesic effect, which was explained by

105 e activity in the target brain region during tDCS.

106 s in the left DLPFC and left striatum during tDCS and an additional MRS measurement in the left DLPFC

107 e on plasticity induced by both facilitatory tDCS and PAS.

108 For facilitatory tDCS, bromocriptine prevented plasticity induction indep

109 ural or neurophysiological changes following tDCS over left M1 or left DLPFC in learning a complex bi

110 erval for the difference in the decrease for tDCS versus escitalopram (difference, -2.3 points; 95% c

111 A mechanistic explanation for tDCS should capture these spatiotemporal features.

112 ork connectivity may be used to guide future tDCS protocols that aim to target and alter neuroplastic

113 ever, this effect was larger under active HD-tDCS than under sham stimulation in both DLPFC groups.

114 ealthy participants were assigned to four HD-tDCS conditions: left or right DLPFC or left or right pr

115 The study thus confirms the potential of HD-tDCS to modulate cognition in a regionally specific mann

116 over, our study confirms the potential of HD-tDCS to modulate cognition in a regionally specific mann

117 Each group underwent both active and sham HD-tDCS in crossover, double-blind designs.

118 transcranial direct current stimulation (HD-tDCS) to demonstrate that the DLPFC is causally involved

119 transcranial direct current stimulation (HD-tDCS), which allows for more focal current delivery than

120 Higher tDCS intensity does not always lead to greater cognitive

121 itive enhancement, little is known about how tDCS affects the human brain, and some studies have conc

122 However, tDCS devices do not have regulatory approval for treatin

123 ory and right hemisphere cathodal-inhibitory tDCS, compared to sham stimulation.

124 d U-shaped dose-response curve on inhibitory tDCS, excitability-diminishing PAS, and to a minor degre

125 acy in verbal modality, and right-inhibitory tDCS improved processing speed with living categories an

126 omains: Left-excitatory and right-inhibitory tDCS improved semantic accuracy in verbal modality, and

127 Nineteen patients were randomized into tDCS and sham-tDCS groups.

128 Here, we investigated tDCS-induced effects in older adults (N = 48; age range,

129 M improvement after initial and longitudinal tDCS.

130 from 1.5 mA tDCS on Visual WM and from 1 mA tDCS on Spatial WM.

131 l/val homozygotes benefited most from 1.5 mA tDCS on Visual WM and from 1 mA tDCS on Spatial WM.

132 ains, and genetic polymorphisms may modulate tDCS-linked WM improvements.

133 Analysis of tDCS only vs sertraline only presented comparable effica

134 proof of concept" for future applications of tDCS in therapeutic multiday regimes, potentially drivin

135 These results reveal the capability of tDCS to cause bidirectional modulation of somatosensory

136 ly plausible assumptions about the effect of tDCS captured the effects of stimulation on both neural

137 This study assessed the effect of tDCS on a battery of emotional processing measures sensi

138 arity-specific, activity-dependent effect of tDCS on false memory opens new vistas for the understand

139 However, neuroplastic after-effects of tDCS are highly dependent on stimulation parameters, rel

140 Most studies compared the effects of tDCS before and after stimulation.

141 is showing that the long-lasting effects of tDCS can counter-intuitively influence specific neural m

142 nvestigate the neurophysiological effects of tDCS in older adults and found stimulation-induced effec

143 us to simultaneously examine the effects of tDCS on brain activity and behavior.

144 able analyses revealed beneficial effects of tDCS on long-term motor learning: (1) stimulation protoc

145 nd meta-analysis investigated the effects of tDCS on motor learning post-stroke.

146 There were no effects of tDCS on other measures of emotional processing.

147 Here, we determined the effects of tDCS on the learning of motor synergies using a novel ha

148 Our findings demonstrate the efficiency of tDCS in sv-PPA by generating highly specific intrasemant

149 ning, there was a significant interaction of tDCS intensity, COMT genotype, and WM task.

150 ontinued 24 h after completion of 0.25 mA of tDCS.

151 The unclear mechanism of tDCS likely depends on tDCS intensity, and task relevant

152 10 time points up to 2 h following 15 min of tDCS.

153 Here, we describe a macaque model of tDCS that allows us to simultaneously examine the effect

154 Noninferiority of tDCS versus escitalopram was defined by a lower boundary

155 havioural effects underline the potential of tDCS to improve mental and physical motor performance.

156 We tested the effects of a single session of tDCS coupled with a Go/No-go task in modulating three di

157 After one session of tDCS, significant group differences in WM performance we

158 One may postulate that repeated sessions of tDCS might induce similar longer lasting effects of elev

159 ividuals with stroke received 10 sessions of tDCS while undergoing usual care physical/occupational t

160 ry evidence that the neural underpinnings of tDCS coupled with rehabilitation exercises, may be media

161 However, the understanding of tDCS-induced alterations on the neuronal level is incomp

162 However, the understanding of tDCS-induced alterations on the neuronal level is incomp

163 of the recent reports on the variability of tDCS-induced effects, not only implicating age as a cruc

164 w avenue for direct in-vivo visualization of tDCS target engagement.

165 unclear mechanism of tDCS likely depends on tDCS intensity, and task relevant genetic factors (e.g.,

166 Molecular consequences of DCS in vitro or tDCS in vivo were tested by immunoblot of protein extrac

167 Within this phase, tDCS furthermore affected task-associated functional con

168 cognitive ToM task during anodal or placebo tDCS over the mPFC.

169 mpleted the task receiving anodal or placebo tDCS over the vertex.

170 Those who received real tDCS performed significantly better in the game than the

171 All effects associated with real tDCS remained 2 months post-training.

172 on, we randomly assigned patients to receive tDCS plus oral placebo, sham tDCS plus escitalopram, or

173 f training, an active control group received tDCS during a non-mathematical task.

174 ry outcome measures for groups that received tDCS and motor practise versus sham control groups creat

175 the mPFC compared with females that received tDCS over the vertex.

176 Patients receiving tDCS had higher rates of skin redness, tinnitus, and ner

177 Moreover, repetitive tDCS diminished self-reported appetite scores.

178 sessions) and long-term (i.e., 15 sessions) tDCS on these variables.Relative to sham tDCS, short-ter

179 DCS (atDCS), cathodal tDCS (ctDCS), and sham tDCS (stDCS) over the left sensorimotor region.

180 pplied over M1, anodal tDCS over DLPFC, sham tDCS over M1, sham tDCS over DLPFC, or no stimulation.

181 dal tDCS over DLPFC, sham tDCS over M1, sham tDCS over DLPFC, or no stimulation.

182 Subjects were randomised to active or sham tDCS after 1 Hz rTMS on separate days and data were comp

183 (i.e., enhancing cortical activity) or sham tDCS aimed at the left DLPFC.

184 Healthy adults received real or sham tDCS over their dorsolateral prefrontal cortices during

185 lacebo, sham tDCS plus escitalopram, or sham tDCS plus oral placebo.

186 and after receiving cathodal, anodal or sham tDCS to the left DLPFC.

187 mpleted the tasks, anodal, cathodal, or sham tDCS was applied over the right dlPFC.

188 the participants who received anodal or sham tDCS.

189 ia were randomized to receive active or sham tDCS.

190 fore and after 20 min of 1 mA anodal or sham tDCS.

191 ents to receive tDCS plus oral placebo, sham tDCS plus escitalopram, or sham tDCS plus oral placebo.

192 Active compared to sham tDCS led to increased performance in the orienting (mean

193 Relative to sham tDCS, anodal tDCS increased activation in right Crus I/I

194 ns) tDCS on these variables.Relative to sham tDCS, short-term anodal tDCS did not influence ad libitu

195 e or thereby weight change, relative to sham tDCS.

196 rgeted at the left DLPFC (compared with sham tDCS) has an immediate effect on eating behavior during

197 mulation, active tDCS, as compared with sham tDCS, did not significantly induce differences in glutam

198 mulation, active tDCS, as compared with sham tDCS, elevated prefrontal N-acetylaspartate and striatal

199 patients were randomized into tDCS and sham-tDCS groups.

200 Qualitatively similar tDCS-associated improvements occurred during training of

201 asure the neurobiological effect of a single tDCS dose during stimulation.

202 visual declarative memory was improved by so-tDCS compared with sham stimulation and was associated w

203 transcranial direct current stimulation (so-tDCS), applied during a daytime nap in a sleep-state-dep

204 eads (to demonstrate feasibility in standard tDCS applications).

205 of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) (anodal, 1.5 mA, 10 min) were applied contralatera

206 ing transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and EEG, we found that greater spatiotemporal patt

207 ned transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and fMRI to assess the behavioral and neural conse

208 as transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) are attracting increasing interest as potential th

209 ith transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) can improve executive function in older adults.

210 hat transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) can modulate human behaviors, symptoms, and neural

211 ing transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) during motor rehabilitation can improve the recove

212 Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) enables noninvasive modulation of cortical activit

213 cal transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) exerts opposite behavioral and physiological effec

214 or transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has been used in stroke rehabilitation, though the

215 Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has emerged as a potentially safe and effective br

216 of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) in relieving symptoms of neurological disorders an

217 Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a noninvasive technique used to modulate brain

218 Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is an attractive protocol for stroke motor recover

219 Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is an emerging non-invasive neuromodulation techni

220 Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) modulates glutamatergic neurotransmission and can

221 Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) modulates human behavior, neuronal patterns, and m

222 ENT Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) modulates human behavior, neuronal patterns, and m

223 her transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) of the dlPFC can prevent stress-induced working me

224 hat transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) of the DLPFC reduces food cravings, we hypothesize

225 as transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) of the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC).

226 ugh transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) of the primary motor cortex (M1) has been found to

227 ham transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) of the right cerebellar hemisphere.

228 Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) of the temporoparietal junction (TPJ) has previous

229 of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) on error awareness in healthy older human adults.

230 transcranial direction current stimulation (tDCS) on the fine control of sequential finger movements

231 of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) on the semantic PPA variant (sv-PPA), applying a r

232 ric transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) over both contralateral and ipsilateral motor cort

233 ing transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) over left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (dlPFC) y

234 ral transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) over sensorimotor areas to modulate neural lateral

235 Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) over the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) ha

236 ly, transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) over the primary motor cortex (M1) has resulted in

237 ith transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) over the right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex.

238 ing transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) preserves action impulses but prevents their behav

239 CT: Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) produces sustained and diffuse current flow in the

240 que transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) targeting a 'top-down' cortico-thalamic pathway of

241 sed transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) to address whether inhibitory processes could be c

242 ion transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) to an fMRI-guided region-of-interest in the left A

243 by transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) to facilitate such representational change.

244 ham transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) to left and right pLPFC and measured participants'

245 use transcranial direct-current stimulation (tDCS) to manipulate brain activity, surprising results a

246 of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) to the motor cortex.

247 ham transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) was applied over the left SMG (Experiment 1) and r

248 dal transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) was compared with the impact on plasticity induced

249 red transcranial direct-current stimulation (tDCS) with a selective serotonin-reuptake inhibitor for

250 ing transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) with cognitive training could further enhance cogn

251 ric transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) with the excitatory anode either over contralatera

252 Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), a form of noninvasive brain stimulation, has been

253 ing transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), a neuromodulatory approach that has previously be

254 ing transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), a non-invasive brain stimulation technique.

255 in transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), a non-invasive technique purported to modulate ne

256 dal transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), an intervention previously shown to decrease GABA

257 ned transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), applied to the right cerebellum, with fMRI to inv

258 CS, transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), for major depression.

259 as transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), have shown promising potential in both restitutin

260 as transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), have shown promising potential in both restitutin

261 dal transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), which induces nonfocal plasticity, and with paire

262 ing transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS)-induced analgesia, neuromodulation occurs through

263 ith transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS).

264 ied transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS).

265 high-definition transcranial DC stimulation (tDCS), we observed that enhancing spontaneous neuronal e

266 ated individuals (P = 0.01), after long-term tDCS.Short-term anodal tDCS of the left DLPFC did not ha

267 se results are consistent with the idea that tDCS leads to widespread changes in brain activity and s

268 The preliminary results indicate that tDCS may facilitate neuroplasticity and suggest the pote

269 These observations indicate that tDCS over the DLPFC has fast excitatory effects, acting

270 Critically, we observed that tDCS effects generalized to untrained hand configuration

271 The present study reports that tDCS applied to the left dorsolateral PFC (dlPFC) shaped

272 A follow-up experiment (n = 156) showed that tDCS only reduced cheating when dishonest behavior benef

273 ongly to the untrained hand, suggesting that tDCS strengthened effector-independent representations.

274 The tDCS was administered in 30-minute, 2-mA prefrontal stim

275 ting-state EEG analyses before and after the tDCS protocols were consistent with the notion of increa

276 escitalopram group, 9.0+/-7.1 points in the tDCS group, and 5.8+/-7.9 points in the placebo group.

277 neuroplasticity can only be detected in the tDCS group, where white matter integrity in the ipsilesi

278 w-onset mania developed in 2 patients in the tDCS group.

279 balanced cross-over design, we applied three tDCS conditions targeting the temporal poles of 12 sv-PP

280 Thus, tDCS to the contralateral pharyngeal motor cortex revers

281 e or chronic stroke; (3) stimulation timing: tDCS before or during motor practise; and (4) task-speci

282 ith 91 being assigned to escitalopram, 94 to tDCS, and 60 to placebo.

283 slices from rats that have been subjected to tDCS of 0.10 or 0.25 mA for 30 min followed by 30 min of

284 In a single-center trial, tDCS for the treatment of depression did not show noninf

285 (1) Typical tDCS montages produce predominantly tangential (relative

286 ight into the neuronal correlates underlying tDCS-induced neuronal plasticity in older adults and thu

287 g nearly twice as strongly as unihemispheric tDCS.

288 We have demonstrated that in vivo tDCS in rats produced a lasting effect on hippocampal sy

289 In vivo, tDCS was delivered to intact mice scalp via surface elec

290 We additionally determined whether tDCS only improved the acquisition of motor memories for

291 tanding of the underlying mechanism by which tDCS affects behaviour.

292 However, the mechanisms by which tDCS effects brain function remain under scrutiny.

293 identify a novel molecular pathway by which tDCS modulates cortical excitability, and indicate a cap

294 However, the exact mechanism by which tDCS modulates the brains neural architecture, from the

295 and these long-range changes correlate with tDCS's effects on behavior.

296 novel long-term motor learning effects with tDCS and motor practise post-stroke.

297 y when neural excitability was enhanced with tDCS.

298 ical function in left DLPFC and left M1 with tDCS.

299 d Visual and Spatial WM training paired with tDCS (sham, 1, 1.5, 2 mA).

300 s, one of the most common montages used with tDCS.