ライフサイエンスコーパス: tDCS

1 tDCS over the sensorimotor cortex interferes with dream

2 tDCS was delivered via bi-frontal target electrodes and

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

4 y of montage selection prior to conducting a tDCS study.

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

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

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

8 In addition, tDCS reduced EEG interhemispheric coherence in parietal

9 esostriatal dopamine system before and after tDCS over prefrontal regions (n = 40, 22 females).

10 ition accuracy was assessed before and after tDCS.

11 es injected through the carotid artery after tDCS.

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

13 hm recognition memory task immediately after tDCS.

14 This behavioral response after tDCS coincided with an enhancement of putative EEG marke

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

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

17 ith AD may have better responses to rTMS and tDCS than MCI.

18 rTMS and tDCS were well tolerated.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

33 rTMS (HFrTMS) and low-frequency rTMS, anodal tDCS (atDCS) and cathodal tDCS (ctDCS), CT, sham CT and

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

44 fine-scale MSE (fast activity) after anodal-tDCS, indicating reversal of pathological abnormalities.

45 targeted these areas with excitatory/anodal-tDCS, or targeted the contralateral homolog areas with i

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

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

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

49 g task was administered inside MEG to assess tDCS-induced neurophysiological changes in relative powe

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

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

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

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

54 vestibular sensations, were not affected by tDCS, confirming the specificity of stimulation effects

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

56 -1mA cathodal tDCS was administered over the left vlPFC versus a contr

57 Acute cathodal tDCS over the left vlPFC relative to the left somatosens

58 uency rTMS, anodal tDCS (atDCS) and cathodal tDCS (ctDCS), CT, sham CT and sham brain stimulation.

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

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

61 plastic after-effects of anodal and cathodal tDCS.

62 e divided into groups of anodal and cathodal tDCS.

63 ct of intensity for both anodal and cathodal tDCS.

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

65 udies can determine whether chronic cathodal tDCS over the left vlPFC has sustained effects on mood i

66 over the left somatosensory cortex, cathodal tDCS over the left vlPFC lowered reward expectancy-relat

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

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

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

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

71 Relative to cathodal tDCS over the left somatosensory cortex, cathodal tDCS o

72 teral homolog areas with inhibitory/cathodal-tDCS, based on prominent theories of stroke recovery.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

80 target brain region during transcranial DCS (tDCS).

81 r and premotor regions using high-definition tDCS (HD-tDCS) with concurrent functional magnetic reson

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

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

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

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

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

87 e activity in the target brain region during tDCS.

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

89 ndings provide new considerations to enhance tDCS reliability.

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

91 his by introducing a systematic approach for tDCS analysis.

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

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

94 nitive control and they suggest that frontal tDCS may be a promising approach to enhance proactive co

95 HD-tDCS applied over either the motor hotspot or the premot

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

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

98 However, HD-tDCS over the premotor cortex led to a higher number of

99 that underwent three separate sessions of HD-tDCS (sham, left DLPFC and right DLPFC) for 20 min.

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

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

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

103 Specifically, HD-tDCS to the right temporoparietal junction, but not anot

104 transcranial direct current stimulation (HD-tDCS) and provided causal evidence that the right tempor

105 transcranial direct current stimulation (HD-tDCS) can reduce MEG abnormalities and transiently impro

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

107 transcranial direct current stimulation (HD-tDCS) to the left or right dorsolateral prefrontal corte

108 transcranial direct current stimulation (HD-tDCS) while participants allocated money between themsel

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

110 motor regions using high-definition tDCS (HD-tDCS) with concurrent functional magnetic resonance imag

111 anges in local fMRI-based complexity than HD-tDCS over the motor hotspot.

112 This is the first causal evidence that HD-tDCS can modulate social embodied processing in a site-s

113 We predicted that HD-tDCS of the left versus right prefrontal cortex would di

114 Our results indicated that HD-tDCS over the left DLPFC differentially modulated right

115 ctivity within the theta band compared to HD-tDCS of the right DLPFC and further, specifically modula

116 Higher tDCS intensity does not always lead to greater cognitive

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

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

119 To achieve functional specificity in tDCS for investigating the two pathways of reading, it i

120 rain statistical parametric maps, indicating tDCS- and l-DOPA-induced activation, and >100 neuronal r

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

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

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

124 o assess the impact of cathodal (inhibitory) tDCS over the left vlPFC on reward circuitry activity, f

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

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

127 M improvement after initial and longitudinal tDCS.

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

129 5-10 min post 20 min-1 mA tDCS, D(eff) increased by ~ 10% for a small solute, sodi

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

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

132 ing studies of the mechanism(s) of action of tDCS at the neuronal and systems levels, the establishme

133 RI, both before and after the application of tDCS aimed at increasing GABA in the anterior lateral oc

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

135 ace (ECS) further predicts that this dose of tDCS increases D(eff) by transiently enhancing the brain

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

137 found a modest and non-significant effect of tDCS on clinical outcome over and above CBT (active: 50%

138 d is suggestive of a direct causal effect of tDCS on consciousness.

139 uding data that appear to favor an effect of tDCS on neural oscillations rather than spiking, and fin

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

148 ations of the potential clinical efficacy of tDCS.

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

150 ncreases in EEG gamma power as a function of tDCS condition (active or sham), that were indicative of

151 ical study that will elucidate the impact of tDCS on brain and behavior, and may pave the way for eff

152 the establishment of the cognitive impact of tDCS, as well as investigations of the potential clinica

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

154 subsequent response to CBT, irrespective of tDCS.

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

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

157 10 time points up to 2 h following 15 min of tDCS.

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

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

160 ty and ECS could explain diverse outcomes of tDCS and suggest novel therapeutic strategies.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

169 on site may contribute to the variability of tDCS results.

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

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

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

173 nition (-0.79, -2.06 to 0.48) during rTMS or tDCS.

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

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

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

177 cy-related activity and negative affect post tDCS.

178 returned to the control level 25-30 min post tDCS.

179 e human dopaminergic system after prefrontal tDCS compared with the administration of the dopamine pr

180 sting of eight weekly sessions of prefrontal tDCS administered to the left prefrontal cortex prior to

181 predictable, clinical effects of prefrontal tDCS combined with CBT for depression.

182 We found that prefrontal tDCS and l-DOPA both enhance neural activity in core reg

183 We propose tDCS also modulates the substance transport in brain tis

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

191 In rodents, tDCS has been shown to increase neural activity in subco

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

201 ia were randomized to receive active or sham tDCS.

202 the participants who received anodal or sham tDCS.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

216 hat transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) allows a manipulation of the dopaminergic system.

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

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

219 ied transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) as an effective approach in randomized controlled

220 ith transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) can be challenging as reading involves regions in

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

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

223 ive transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) during adolescence, prior to schizophrenia-relevan

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

225 tal transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has been proposed as an alternative treatment, but

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

227 ral transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) in conjunction with 20 min of the arm cycling, the

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

229 Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a promising method for altering the function of

230 Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) is a well-tolerated neuromodulation technique that

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

239 ric transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) or sham stimulation, guided by functional mapping

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

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

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

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

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

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

246 of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) placed over the motor hotspot (thought to represen

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

248 to transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) suggests a generalizable mechanism of action.

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

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

251 use transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) to examine the role of the prefrontal cortex (PFC)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

263 ng trans-cranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), neocortical memory interference increases in prop

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

265 ith transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS).

266 em: transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS).

267 do so, we tested the impact of PFC-targeted tDCS on behavioral and electrophysiological markers of p

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

269 cent studies in humans provide evidence that tDCS over prefrontal regions induces striatal dopamine r

270 tions rather than spiking, and findings that tDCS administration to the prefrontal cortex during task

271 We found that tDCS, compared to sham stimulation, significantly decrea

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

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

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

275 le according to this biomarker revealed that tDCS was significantly superior to sham in individuals w

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

283 a sensitive measure for guiding therapeutic tDCS.

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

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

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

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

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

289 g nearly twice as strongly as unihemispheric tDCS.

290 decreasing visual cortex excitability using tDCS increases imagery strength, demonstrating a causati

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

292 We probed (1) whether tDCS improved the efficacy of CBT relative to sham stimu

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

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

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.