These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

292 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31653475)

  • 1. Dose-controlled tDCS reduces electric field intensity variability at a cortical target site.
    Evans C; Bachmann C; Lee JSA; Gregoriou E; Ward N; Bestmann S
    Brain Stimul; 2020; 13(1):125-136. PubMed ID: 31653475
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Inter-individual variability in current direction for common tDCS montages.
    Evans C; Zich C; Lee JSA; Ward N; Bestmann S
    Neuroimage; 2022 Oct; 260():119501. PubMed ID: 35878726
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Systematic assessment of duration and intensity of anodal transcranial direct current stimulation on primary motor cortex excitability.
    Tremblay S; Larochelle-Brunet F; Lafleur LP; El Mouderrib S; Lepage JF; Théoret H
    Eur J Neurosci; 2016 Sep; 44(5):2184-90. PubMed ID: 27336413
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Systematic evaluation of the impact of stimulation intensity on neuroplastic after-effects induced by transcranial direct current stimulation.
    Jamil A; Batsikadze G; Kuo HI; Labruna L; Hasan A; Paulus W; Nitsche MA
    J Physiol; 2017 Feb; 595(4):1273-1288. PubMed ID: 27723104
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Response variability of different anodal transcranial direct current stimulation intensities across multiple sessions.
    Ammann C; Lindquist MA; Celnik PA
    Brain Stimul; 2017; 10(4):757-763. PubMed ID: 28420581
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Inter-subject Variability in Electric Fields of Motor Cortical tDCS.
    Laakso I; Tanaka S; Koyama S; De Santis V; Hirata A
    Brain Stimul; 2015; 8(5):906-13. PubMed ID: 26026283
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. tDCS induced GABA change is associated with the simulated electric field in M1, an effect mediated by grey matter volume in the MRS voxel.
    Nandi T; Puonti O; Clarke WT; Nettekoven C; Barron HC; Kolasinski J; Hanayik T; Hinson EL; Berrington A; Bachtiar V; Johnstone A; Winkler AM; Thielscher A; Johansen-Berg H; Stagg CJ
    Brain Stimul; 2022; 15(5):1153-1162. PubMed ID: 35988862
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Effects of electrode angle-orientation on the impact of transcranial direct current stimulation on motor cortex excitability.
    Foerster Á; Yavari F; Farnad L; Jamil A; Paulus W; Nitsche MA; Kuo MF
    Brain Stimul; 2019; 12(2):263-266. PubMed ID: 30389333
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. tDCS changes in motor excitability are specific to orientation of current flow.
    Rawji V; Ciocca M; Zacharia A; Soares D; Truong D; Bikson M; Rothwell J; Bestmann S
    Brain Stimul; 2018; 11(2):289-298. PubMed ID: 29146468
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Differential effects of cathodal transcranial direct current stimulation of prefrontal, motor and somatosensory cortices on cortical excitability and pain perception - a double-blind randomised sham-controlled study.
    Vaseghi B; Zoghi M; Jaberzadeh S
    Eur J Neurosci; 2015 Oct; 42(7):2426-37. PubMed ID: 26275236
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Inter- and Intra-individual Variability in Response to Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) at Varying Current Intensities.
    Chew T; Ho KA; Loo CK
    Brain Stimul; 2015; 8(6):1130-7. PubMed ID: 26294061
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Can electric fields explain inter-individual variability in transcranial direct current stimulation of the motor cortex?
    Laakso I; Mikkonen M; Koyama S; Hirata A; Tanaka S
    Sci Rep; 2019 Jan; 9(1):626. PubMed ID: 30679770
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. The Effect of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) Electrode Size and Current Intensity on Motor Cortical Excitability: Evidence From Single and Repeated Sessions.
    Ho KA; Taylor JL; Chew T; Gálvez V; Alonzo A; Bai S; Dokos S; Loo CK
    Brain Stimul; 2016; 9(1):1-7. PubMed ID: 26350410
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Cost of focality in TDCS: Interindividual variability in electric fields.
    Mikkonen M; Laakso I; Tanaka S; Hirata A
    Brain Stimul; 2020; 13(1):117-124. PubMed ID: 31606449
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Efficacy of Anodal Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation is Related to Sensitivity to Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation.
    Labruna L; Jamil A; Fresnoza S; Batsikadze G; Kuo MF; Vanderschelden B; Ivry RB; Nitsche MA
    Brain Stimul; 2016; 9(1):8-15. PubMed ID: 26493498
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Optimized APPS-tDCS electrode position, size, and distance doubles the on-target stimulation magnitude in 3000 electric field models.
    Caulfield KA; George MS
    Sci Rep; 2022 Nov; 12(1):20116. PubMed ID: 36418438
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Simultaneous transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and whole-head magnetoencephalography (MEG): assessing the impact of tDCS on slow cortical magnetic fields.
    Garcia-Cossio E; Witkowski M; Robinson SE; Cohen LG; Birbaumer N; Soekadar SR
    Neuroimage; 2016 Oct; 140():33-40. PubMed ID: 26455796
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Reduced Current Spread by Concentric Electrodes in Transcranial Electrical Stimulation (tES).
    Bortoletto M; Rodella C; Salvador R; Miranda PC; Miniussi C
    Brain Stimul; 2016; 9(4):525-8. PubMed ID: 27061368
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Spatial and polarity precision of concentric high-definition transcranial direct current stimulation (HD-tDCS).
    Alam M; Truong DQ; Khadka N; Bikson M
    Phys Med Biol; 2016 Jun; 61(12):4506-21. PubMed ID: 27223853
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. No significant effect of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) found on simple motor reaction time comparing 15 different simulation protocols.
    Horvath JC; Carter O; Forte JD
    Neuropsychologia; 2016 Oct; 91():544-552. PubMed ID: 27664296
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 15.