tDCS polarity effects in motor and cognitive domains: a meta-analytical review

By Liron Jacobson, M. Koslowsky, Michal Lavidor. Experimental Brain Research, 2011

854 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Biomedical Engineering, Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience, Neurology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/7a37d9db7a6b0a2a9f384dc36be03af23d7f899d

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Biomedical Engineering

1. Michael A. Nitsche
2. Walter Paulus
3. A. Brunoni
4. Leonardo G. Cohen
5. Felipe Fregni
6. Agnes Flöel

In Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience

1. Michael A. Nitsche
2. C. J. Stagg
3. Walter Paulus
4. David Liebetanz
5. Leonardo G. Cohen
6. Felipe Fregni
7. Andrea Antal
8. Marom Bikson

In Neurology

1. Michael A. Nitsche
2. Walter Paulus
3. Leonardo G. Cohen
4. Felipe Fregni
5. C. J. Stagg
6. Agnes Flöel
7. David Liebetanz
8. Andrea Antal

Citations in the corpus

• A technical guide to tDCS, and related non-invasive brain stimulation tools (2015, background): “Finally, cognitive tDCS protocols should consider the possibility that differences in polarity, current intensity, electrode size, time of stimulation and volunteer group lead to different modulatory effects (Boggio et al., 2006; Jacobson et al., 2012; Kuo and Nitsche, 2012; Carvalho et al., 2014).”
• Safety of transcranial Direct Current Stimulation: Evidence Based Update 2016 (2016, background): “Furthermore, once implemented, there are concerns regarding the behavioral correlates of electrode placement [181] as well as the possibility of unexpected effects with improper dose [182].”