Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2013 Oct 21:7:688.
doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2013.00688. eCollection 2013.

Origins of specificity during tDCS: anatomical, activity-selective, and input-bias mechanisms

Affiliations

Origins of specificity during tDCS: anatomical, activity-selective, and input-bias mechanisms

Marom Bikson et al. Front Hum Neurosci. .

Abstract

Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) is investigated for a broad range of neuropsychiatric indications, various rehabilitation applications, and to modulate cognitive performance in diverse tasks. Specificity of tDCS refers broadly to the ability of tDCS to produce precise, as opposed to diffuse, changes in brain function. Practically, specificity of tDCS implies application-specific customization of protocols to maximize desired outcomes and minimize undesired effects. Especially given the simplicity of tDCS and the complexity of brain function, understanding the mechanisms leading to specificity is fundamental to the rational advancement of tDCS. We define the origins of specificity based on anatomical and functional factors. Anatomical specificity derives from guiding current to targeted brain structures. Functional specificity may derive from either activity-selectivity, where active neuronal networks are preferentially modulated by tDCS, or input-selectivity, where bias is applied to different synaptic inputs. Rational advancement of tDCS may require leveraging all forms of specificity.

Keywords: anatomical brain connectivity; neuromodulation; stimulation protocol; transcranial direct current stimulation; transcranial magnetic stimulation.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Antal A., Bikson M., Datta A., Lafon B., Dechent P., Parra L. C., et al. (2012). Imaging artifacts induced by electrical stimulation during conventional fMRI of the brain. Neuroimage 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.10.026 [Epub ahead of print] - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Arlotti M., Rahman A., Minhas P., Bikson M. (2012). Axon terminal polarization induced by weak uniform DC electric fields: a modeling study. Conf. Proc. IEEE Eng. Med. Biol. Soc. 2012 4575–4578 10.1109/EMBC.2012.6346985 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Batsikadze G., Moliadze V., Paulus W., Kuo M. F., Nitsche M. A. (2013). Partially non-linear stimulation intensity-dependent effects of direct current stimulation on motor cortex excitability in humans. J. Physiol. 591 1987–2000 10.1113/jphysiol.2012.249730 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Bikson M., Inoue M., Akiyama H., Deans J. K., Fox J. E., Miyakawa H., et al. (2004). Effects of uniform extracellular DC electric fields on excitability in rat hippocampal slices in vitro. J. Physiol. 557 175–190 10.1113/jphysiol.2003.055772 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Bindman L. J., Lippold O. C., Redfearn J. W. (1962). Long-lasting changes in the level of the electrical activity of the cerebral cortex produced by polarizing currents. Nature 196 584–585 10.1038/196584a0 - DOI - PubMed