| Literature DB >> 30639235 |
Clara Fonteneau1, Marine Mondino1, Martijn Arns2, Chris Baeken3, Marom Bikson4, Andre R Brunoni5, Matthew J Burke6, Tuomas Neuvonen7, Frank Padberg8, Alvaro Pascual-Leone6, Emmanuel Poulet1, Giulio Ruffini9, Emiliano Santarnecchi6, Anne Sauvaget10, Klaus Schellhorn11, Marie-Françoise Suaud-Chagny1, Ulrich Palm8, Jérome Brunelin12.
Abstract
Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a non-invasive brain stimulation technique increasingly used to modulate neural activity in the living brain. In order to establish the neurophysiological, cognitive or clinical effects of tDCS, most studies compare the effects of active tDCS to those observed with a sham tDCS intervention. In most cases, sham tDCS consists in delivering an active stimulation for a few seconds to mimic the sensations observed with active tDCS and keep participants blind to the intervention. However, to date, sham-controlled tDCS studies yield inconsistent results, which might arise in part from sham inconsistencies. Indeed, a multiplicity of sham stimulation protocols is being used in the tDCS research field and might have different biological effects beyond the intended transient sensations. Here, we seek to enlighten the scientific community to this possible confounding factor in order to increase reproducibility of neurophysiological, cognitive and clinical tDCS studies.Entities:
Keywords: Placebo; Reproducibility; Sham; Transcranial direct current stimulation; Variability; tDCS
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30639235 DOI: 10.1016/j.brs.2018.12.977
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Brain Stimul ISSN: 1876-4754 Impact factor: 8.955