2016
DOI: 10.1016/j.neures.2016.06.003
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Differential effects of primary motor cortex and cerebellar transcranial direct current stimulation on motor learning in healthy individuals: A randomized double-blind sham-controlled study

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

7
94
8
3

Year Published

2016
2016
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 63 publications
(112 citation statements)
references
References 43 publications
7
94
8
3
Order By: Relevance
“…Indeed we showed that modulatory effects of these connections were significantly smaller in patients and did not differ between conditions, probably due to the degeneration in cerebellum. Recent studies in healthy controls have shown that modulation of cerebellar activity using transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) can influence motor learning behavior (Block and Celnik, 2013, Cantarero et al, 2015, Ehsani et al, 2016, Ferrucci et al, 2013, Galea et al, 2011, Herzfeld et al, 2014, Shimizu et al, 2017). Specifically, this effect has been shown to be polarity specific; anodal tDCS to cerebellum is thought to enhance neuronal excitability and was shown to enhance learning whereas the opposite effect was evident in some studies.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Indeed we showed that modulatory effects of these connections were significantly smaller in patients and did not differ between conditions, probably due to the degeneration in cerebellum. Recent studies in healthy controls have shown that modulation of cerebellar activity using transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) can influence motor learning behavior (Block and Celnik, 2013, Cantarero et al, 2015, Ehsani et al, 2016, Ferrucci et al, 2013, Galea et al, 2011, Herzfeld et al, 2014, Shimizu et al, 2017). Specifically, this effect has been shown to be polarity specific; anodal tDCS to cerebellum is thought to enhance neuronal excitability and was shown to enhance learning whereas the opposite effect was evident in some studies.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In further support of this notion, delayed effects have been demonstrated even in the absence of immediate effects. For example, there have been rapid consolidation effects where group differences only begin to emerge in the minutes or hours after stimulation, or become stronger/more robust with time (e.g., Clark et al 2012;Ehsani et al 2016;Hoy et al 2014;Javadi and Cheng 2013;Penolazzi et al 2013;Reis et al 2015). Similarly, overnight consolidation has been enhanced when performance is measured the next day, despite a lack of group differences on day 1 (Koyama et al 2015;Martin et al 2014), and even cognitive training studies that failed to show immediate tDCS-related enhancements have still demonstrated greater tDCS-related retention a couple months later (Jones et al 2015;Martin et al 2013;Stephens and Berryhill 2016).…”
Section: Experimental Evidencementioning
confidence: 99%
“…This is shown by reduced reaction times (RTs), a common way to quantify sequence acquisition (Nitsche et al, 2003; Kang and Paik, 2011; Kantak et al, 2012; Ehsani et al, 2016). Comparably reduced RTs were found during the recall of a sequence task when tDCS was applied over premotor (PM) cortex throughout REM sleep (Nitsche et al, 2010).…”
Section: Modulating Motor Learning Processes Through Tdcsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Only a few studies have addressed the effects of cerebellar atDCS on sequence learning. For example, cerebellar stimulation applied during SRTT performance reduced the error rate (Ehsani et al, 2016), whereas it reduced RTs when applied prior to a follow-up session (Ferrucci et al, 2013). Interestingly, both M1 and cerebellar atDCS showed enhanced retention of SRTT performance (Ehsani et al, 2016).…”
Section: Modulating Motor Learning Processes Through Tdcsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation