Use this link to cite:
http://hdl.handle.net/2183/34964 A preliminary comparison of motor learning across different non-invasive brain stimulation paradigms shows no consistent modulations
Loading...
Identifiers
Publication date
Authors
Cheeran, Binith
Sandrini, Marco
Abe, Mitsunari
Cohen, Leonardo
Liew, Sook Lei
Advisors
Other responsabilities
Journal Title
Bibliographic citation
Lopez-Alonso V, Liew S-L, Fernández del Olmo M, Cheeran B, Sandrini M, Abe M and Cohen LG (2018) A Preliminary Comparison of Motor Learning Across Different Non-invasive Brain Stimulation Paradigms Shows No Consistent Modulations. Front. Neurosci. 12:253.doi: 10.3389/fnins.2018.00253
Type of academic work
Academic degree
Abstract
[Abstract]: Non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) has been widely explored as a way to safely
modulate brain activity and alter human performance for nearly three decades. Research
using NIBS has grown exponentially within the last decade with promising results across
a variety of clinical and healthy populations. However, recent work has shown high
inter-individual variability and a lack of reproducibility of previous results. Here, we
conducted a small preliminary study to explore the effects of three of the most commonly
used excitatory NIBS paradigms over the primary motor cortex (M1) on motor learning
(Sequential Visuomotor Isometric Pinch Force Tracking Task) and secondarily relate
changes in motor learning to changes in cortical excitability (MEP amplitude and SICI).
We compared anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), paired associative
stimulation (PAS25), and intermittent theta burst stimulation (iTBS), along with a sham
tDCS control condition. Stimulation was applied prior to motor learning. Participants
(n = 28) were randomized into one of the four groups and were trained on a skilled
motor task. Motor learning was measured immediately after training (online), 1 day after
training (consolidation), and 1 week after training (retention). We did not find consistent
differential effects on motor learning or cortical excitability across groups. Within the
boundaries of our small sample sizes, we then assessed effect sizes across the NIBS
groups that could help power future studies. These results, which require replication with
larger samples, are consistent with previous reports of small and variable effect sizes of
these interventions on motor learning.
Description
Editor version
Rights
Atribución 3.0 España






