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
Meta-Analysis
. 2024 Aug 19;14(1):19197.
doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-70065-7.

Meta-analysis of variance in tDCS effects on response inhibition

Luca Lasogga  1   2 , Chiara Gramegna  3 , Dario Müller  4 , Ute Habel  4   5 , David M A Mehler  4   6   7 , Ruben C Gur  8 , Carmen Weidler  4
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Meta-analysis of variance in tDCS effects on response inhibition

Luca Lasogga et al. Sci Rep. .

Abstract

Deficiencies in response inhibition are associated with numerous mental health conditions, warranting innovative treatments. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), a non-invasive brain stimulation technique, modulates cortical excitability and has shown promise in improving response inhibition. However, tDCS effects on response inhibition often yield contradictory findings. Previous research emphasized the importance of inter-individual factors that are mostly ignored in conventional meta-analyses of mean effects. We aimed to fill this gap and promote the complementary use of the coefficient of variation ratio and standardized mean effects. The systematic literature search included single-session and sham-controlled tDCS studies utilizing stop-signal task or Go-NoGo tasks, analyzing 88 effect sizes from 53 studies. Considering the impact of inter-individual factors, we hypothesized that variances increase in the active versus sham tDCS. However, the results showed that variances between both groups did not differ. Additionally, analyzing standardized mean effects supported previous research showing an improvement in the stop-signal task but not in the Go-NoGo task following active tDCS. These findings suggest that inter-individual differences do not increase variances in response inhibition, implying that the heterogeneity cannot be attributed to higher variance in response inhibition during and after active tDCS. Furthermore, methodological considerations are crucial for tDCS efficacy.

Keywords: Coefficient of variation ratio; Inter-individual differences; Response inhibition; Transcranial direct current stimulation.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no competing interests.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Forest plot of CVR multi-level meta-analysis.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Bar graph displaying effect sizes of transcranial direct current stimulation effects on performance in the Stop Signal Task (SST) and Go/NoGo Task (GNGT). Performance in the GNGT did not significantly differ between active and sham tDCS (no difference from zero; p = 0.890), whereas performance in the SST was significantly improved in active as compared to sham tDCS (significant difference from zero; p = 0.01).
Figure 3
Figure 3
Funnel plot of effect sizes and standard error differences (hedges g).
Figure 4
Figure 4
PRISMA flowchart of the literature search.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Xu, P., Wu, D., Chen, Y., Wang, Z. & Xiao, W. The effect of response inhibition training on risky decision-making task performance. Front. Psychol.11, 1806 (2020). 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01806 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Liu, W., Peeters, N., Fernández, G. & Kohn, N. Common neural and transcriptional correlates of inhibitory control underlie emotion regulation and memory control. Soc. Cogn. Affect. Neurosci.15, 523–536 (2020). 10.1093/scan/nsaa073 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Dillon, D. G. & Pizzagalli, D. A. Inhibition of action, thought, and emotion: A selective neurobiological review. Appl. Prev. Psychol.12, 99–114 (2007). 10.1016/j.appsy.2007.09.004 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Verbruggen, F. et al. A consensus guide to capturing the ability to inhibit actions and impulsive behaviors in the stop-signal task. eLife8, e46323 (2019). 10.7554/eLife.46323 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Abramovitch, A. & Cooperman, A. The cognitive neuropsychology of obsessive-compulsive disorder: A critical review. J. Obsessive-Compuls. Relat. Disord.5, 24–36 (2015).10.1016/j.jocrd.2015.01.002 - DOI

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources